-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Irene van Staveren, Colin Danby, Introduction to the symposium on post-Keynesian and feminist economics, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Volume 34, Issue 6, November 2010, Pages 1105–1107, https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/beq018
Close - Share Icon Share
Extract
The papers in this symposium treat feminist economics as a source of foundational insight and critique. They extend a dialogue between the feminist and post-Keynesian literatures on questions of theory, method, epistemology and ontology.
Dialogues across literatures raise questions of delimitation. Efforts to axiomatise post-Keynesianism are contentious. Feminist economics is even harder to typify given the range of feminist theories and variety of relevant economics paradigms. These questions are discussed in Siobhan Austen and Therese Jefferson's paper for this symposium. To borrow a term from Hamouda and Harcourt (1988), we approach both post-Keynesianism and feminism as capacious portmanteaus. We look for particular, well-formed ideas within each large tradition that might be helpful in the other.
Kaleckian feminism has been, so far, the richest channel of communication between the two literatures. Lourdes Benería, Elissa Braunstein, Nilüfer Çağatay, Diane Elson, Gerald Epstein, Maria Floro, Caren Grown, James Heinz, Stephanie Seguino and other writers have used a range of insights from feminist economics and sociology to extend structural macroeconomics. They have drawn stylised facts from a range of household and workplace studies, and engaged an impressive range of empirical data. This literature, which is further discussed in van Staveren's paper for this symposium, demonstrates the potential for engagement between post-Keynesian and feminist economics.
