Economic Efficiency or Gender Equality: Conceptualizing an Equitable “Social Framing” for Economic Evaluations to Support Gender Equality in Disaster Risk- and Environmental-Management Decision-Making

Shreve, Cheney (2016) Economic Efficiency or Gender Equality: Conceptualizing an Equitable “Social Framing” for Economic Evaluations to Support Gender Equality in Disaster Risk- and Environmental-Management Decision-Making. Resources, 5 (3). p. 25. ISSN 2079-9276

[img]
Preview
Text
resources-05-00025.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

Download (236kB) | Preview
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.3390/resources5030025

Abstract

It is unlikely that cost–benefit approaches will be effective in identifying investments that support gender equality without a relevant “social framing”. Criteria for a “social framing” are lacking, yet cost–benefit approaches often guide investment decisions for disaster risk and environmental management. Mainstream approaches typically do a poor job identifying and characterizing costs and benefits, and often fail to address distributive concerns (i.e., how costs and benefits may be distributed throughout society, to whom, etc.). Gender-blind investments may project responsibility for equality “problems” onto one sex, potentially augmenting gender inequalities and disaster risk. This article examines evidence from the gender, disaster, and development literature to identify distributive concerns and criteria for an equitable “social framing” for economic evaluations. Primary distributive concerns identified regard assumptions of women’s homogeneity, agency, “active” participation, and the influence of customary practice and displacement on disaster vulnerability. The need for a “gender-responsive” “social framing” that considers the needs of men and women in relation to one another is evident. Second, cost–benefit studies focused on gender equality concerns are reviewed and the “social framing” is critiqued. Results show most studies are not “gender-responsive”. Women’s health concerns, often exacerbated by disasters, are sidelined by assumptions regarding distributive concerns and reductive outcome measures.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: cost–benefit analysis; cost effectiveness analysis; gender equality; disasters; environment; ethics; gender mainstreaming; disaggregated data
Subjects: L700 Human and Social Geography
Department: Faculties > Engineering and Environment > Geography and Environmental Sciences
Depositing User: Becky Skoyles
Date Deposited: 08 May 2017 10:46
Last Modified: 07 Sep 2017 08:51
URI: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/id/eprint/30698

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics


Policies: NRL Policies | NRL University Deposit Policy | NRL Deposit Licence