How Well Does the United Nations System Address Women’s Economic
Concerns?

Summary of “Women’s Economic Agenda in the 21st Century” by Maria Riley,
published on Gender and Trade website, www.genderandtrade.net

In this article, Riley analyzes the effectiveness of the United Nations
system in defending women’s economic concerns. Her main focus is on the
Outcomes Document resulting from the Beijing +5 meeting in 2000 which, she
argues, does not adequately the concerns of women’s organizations who
participate in these meetings. Thus, she advocates that women formulate a
new economic agenda, one which accurately represents their concerns and
which
defines these concerns in terms of economic rights for all.

The bulk of the article details the negative consequences of globalization.
The author examines the various aspects of the globalization process such as
Structural Adjustments Programs (SAP’s), trade and investment
liberalization,
foreign debt reduction programs and stabilization policies and the ways
these
increase poverty and inequality and, in particular, increase burdens on
women. In regards to SAPs, for example, Riley notes how the withdrawal of
the state from providing many social services merely shifted the
responsibility for social needs to women. She connects the current debt
relief programs put forward by the G8, the World Bank and the IMF to the
problems of SAPs. For Riley, the conditionalities placed on countries
receiving debt relief mean that they are being forced into further trade
liberalization and marketization and this means women will be disadvantaged.
She also indicates that the amount of debt forgiven under these programs is
minimal.

The above issues have been discussed many times before. The more
interesting
aspect of this article is its argument that the UN system is inadequate for
addressing women’s concerns related to globalization. Examining the Beijing
+5 meeting and the Outcomes Document which came out of it, she discusses how
the political nature of the UN means that it cannot fully represent women’s
issues. For example, she discusses how during the Beijing +5 meeting,
delegates had initially succeeded in including paragraphs in the Outcomes
Document describing the negative consequences of globalization for women.
However, in the end, the U.S. government representatives were able to have
this wording removed since any criticism of globalization is against U.S.
interests.

Other deficiencies of the Outcomes Document and the UN system in general
include the document’s support of debt reduction initiatives, the problems
of
which were discussed above. Also, Riley criticizes the document’s support
of
the World Bank’s Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs). Her main
criticism of these is that they quite correctly advocate broad participation
in the formulation of national poverty reduction programs but provide few
mechanisms for ensuring this participation.

Another major problem with the UN’s pronouncements Riley identifies is that
they often adequately describe the negative consequences of globalization
and
trade liberalization for women but offers few concrete solutions to correct
them. Thus, it will advocate that national governments adopt policies to
improve the rights of women under globalization without recognizing the
barriers governments face in implementing these as a result of Structural
Adjustment Programs and other conditionalities placed on them by the World
Bank and the IMF. These recommendations, then, are often meaningless.

The final thrust of the article articulates a new economic agenda to move
beyond the limitations of the UN system. For Riley, such an agenda would
place social issues at the core of economic policy in order to make poverty
reduction and equity a priority. Here, she argues that women’s movements go
beyond promoting these issues as women’s rights and begin promoting them as
concerns for all. Women are in a good position, she says, to promote such
an
agenda on poverty reduction and equity since they have experienced the brunt
of the negative effects of globalization.

While a large part of the article focuses on the widely discussed issues of
the problems of globalization for women, this article is useful for two
reasons. First of all, it provides an interesting analysis of why the UN
system is inadequate for addressing women’s concerns. Also, it proposes
moving beyond the UN system by articulating a framework in which women
define
their economic agenda as an agenda for all. In order to increase the
strength of her argument, Riley should further outline how such a new agenda
would work. In particular, she does not discuss which forums and
organizations could be used to advance this agenda given that the UN, in her
opinion, is largely ineffective.

----------------------------------------
THE AWID RESOURCE NET is brought to you by The Association for Women's
Rights in Development (AWID). Announcements posted on this discussion list
do not necessarily reflect the opinion of AWID, but are meant to provoke
thought, generate solutions and inspire action.
*
To join this list, simply send an email with the words 'subscribe resource'
in the body of the email message to [email protected].
*
To remove yourself from this list, send an email with the words 'unsubscribe
resource' in the body of the email message to [email protected].
*
To contribute to Resource Net write to [email protected].
*
You are free to replicate AWID's information in other formats, and use it in
your advocacy, provided you give credit to the Association.
*
AWID is an international membership organization committed to gender
equality
and a just and sustainable development process. AWID facilitates an open
exchange among researchers, practitioners, policymakers and others in order
to develop effective and transformative approaches for improving the lives
of
women and girls worldwide. If you are not already a member of AWID, find out
more about the Association by sending a blank e-mail message to
[email protected], or visit our web site at www.awid.org. You can
also contact us directly to receive a free information packet.
*
The Association for Women's Rights in Development
666 11th Street, NW, Suite 450
Washington, DC 20001
USA
Tel: 202-628-0440
Fax: 202-628-0442
Email: [email protected]
*
Toronto Secretariat:
96 Spadina Avenue, Suite 401
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5V 2J6
Tel: 416 594 3773
Fax: 416 594 0330
Email: [email protected]