1. Introduction 3 Understanding women’s economic and social rights 10
|
|  Yüklə 0.78 Mb.
|
2.2 Advancing gender sensitive interpretations of economic and social rights54Much work remains to ensure that all economic and social rights are ‘engendered’ from a women’s equality perspective. In this regard, it is vital that we approach women’s economic and social rights through a substantive equality perspective, which understands that the notion of equality cannot be seen in a purely formal sense. Rather, as has been underscored by both the CEDAW Committee and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, substantive equality entails that women must be guaranteed de facto equality with respect to their economic and social rights, so that they are able to enjoy these rights in practice.55 In particular, “the substantive equality approach requires States to acknowledge the actual impact policies and practices have on women, looking at the particular context and take positive measures to ensure equal access and equal benefits for women.”56 The requirement of de facto equality is also a legal requirement under international human rights law. While economic and social rights are themselves well articulated in international human rights law, and have over the years seen increasing refinement in terms of content and understanding of State obligations, there remains a gap in the understanding of how gender inequality affects the experience of either the enjoyment or violation of those rights, and hence, how economic and social rights can be understood from a gendered perspective. It is important to see economic and social rights not from a generic or gender-blind perspective, but rather from the perspectives of women. So as to illuminate further this question, Section 3 of this paper looks more closely at many of these rights from the standpoint of women’s equality, through the lens of women’s life cycle. The Montreal Principles on Women’s Economic, Social and Cultural Rights have been an important contribution in moving toward this understanding and this nexus.57 They recognize that: Economic, social and cultural rights have a particular significance for women because as a group, women are disproportionately affected by poverty, and by social and cultural marginalization. Women’s poverty is a central manifestation, and a direct result of women’s lesser social, economic and political power. In turn, women’s poverty reinforces their subordination, and constrains their enjoyment of every other right.58 Therefore, it is vital to delve into the question of what economic and social rights mean from a gender perspective, and how economic and social rights, and women’s rights to non-discrimination and equality, relate to each other. One pitfall, which we should be careful not to fall into as we discuss this relationship, is that of ‘instrumentalizing’ women’s right to equality or women’s economic and social rights. That is, we must be careful to ensure that the primary value or emphasis in terms of advancement for women is not on some external aim (i.e. improvement of social welfare, improvement of children’s health and well-being, or improvement of economies) but rather on the intrinsic value of women’s equality itself. That is not to say that there are not very important benefits which accrue when women are able to enjoy their human rights – certainly there are many – but rather that the primary emphasis should remain on advancing women’s equality and gender justice. Not for some other cause, but for its own sake.59 For example, while it is no doubt important to highlight women’s vital contribution to economies around the world, the World Bank has come under criticism from some women’s rights advocates and feminist economists for instrumentalizing women and reducing women’s equality to “smart economics.” A line of thinking which seemingly embraces the idea that the advancement of women’s rights is important insofar as women are ‘economic units’ that can boost national economic development .60 It is a vision which stands somewhat at odds with a human rights centered approach to economic policy making – which would see the advancement of women’s human rights in economic and social life as the aim and the goal, not merely the vehicle to achieving some other end. Transforming the Instrumentalist View of Women “States must respect, protect and fulfill human rights obligations and ensure that responses to the crisis do the same. For example, proposed monetary or fiscal responses to the crisis must be reviewed from the perspective of their effect on the enjoyment of human rights, not solely on their effect on growth.” -Natalie Raaber & Diana Aguiar Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID) Feminist critiques, policy alternatives and calls for systemic change to an economy in crisis Part of the key to transforming the instrumentalist view of women lies in gender sensitization and changing the values that underpin the dominant economic model; a model where women’s leadership has been largely absent: It is clear that fewer women than men are involved in financial and economic decision making. The European Commission’s 2009 Report on Equality between Women and Men indicates that the Central Banks of all Member States were led by a male governor and its 2007 Report indicated that on average, the highest decision-making bodies of EU central banks include five men for every women. At European level, all three of the financial institutions (European Central Bank, European Investment Ban and European Investment Fund) are led by men and women account for only 16% of the highest decision-making bodies of these institutions. A number of commentators consider that increasing the proportion of women decision makers in these sectors may contribute to promoting a more gender-sensitive analysis of related responses. It is also clear that decision makers generally need to be sensitive to the gender dimension of their work.61 The Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID) has highlighted that “Women need to take part in fiscal processes and in the broader debates around responses to the crisis as these affect their lives: planning and implementing budgets and dealing with tax policies are just two examples of spaces in which women should be.”62 In terms of good practice, the Government of Iceland has sought to ensure equal numbers of women and men on public committees, councils and boards. The proportion of genders must be as even as possible and not less than 40 per cent when there are more than three members. This standard on gender representation also applies to the boards of public companies on which the Government or local authorities are represented.63 In Malaysia, in June 2011, the Government mandated a 30 per cent target for women representation at senior decision-making and corporate boards by 2016.64 To realize the target, the Government has introduced the Women Directors Programme, which aims to prepare qualified women for directorship roles in publicly-listed companies.65 |