Feminism and the Anthropology of 'Development'

Feminism and the Anthropology of ‘Development’: Dilemmas in Rural Mexico Julia E. Murphy ABSTRACT: Feminist promotion of gender equity in development began in the 1970s, challenging development policy and practice and producing a rich body of debate and scholarship. Feminist anthropologists, through scholarship and activism, made important contributions to the project of reforming development. A recent anthropological critique of development, however, referred to as the anthropology of ‘development’, has raised important questions about anthropology’s relationship to development, presenting new challenges to feminist anthropologists who would engage with development. This new approach, despite its a ention to power, has not had questions about gender at its centre. Drawing on fi eldwork in southeastern Campeche, Mexico, this paper explores challenges of a feminist anthropology of ‘development’, including pressures for engagement and disengagement, and the apparent contradiction between refl exive critiques of, and feminist engagements with, development. KEYWORDS: anthropology of ‘development’, Calakmul, engaged anthropology, feminist anthropology, gender and development, Mexico Anthropology, Feminism, of development theory and challenged de- and Development velopment practice. Feminist anthropologists working on development have thus bridged Introduction the fi elds of feminism, development and The engagement of feminists in the promo- anthropology. tion of gender equity in development policy A recent anthropological critique of de- and practice began in the 1970s. It has trans- velopment, however, referred to as the an- formed development practice and produced thropology of ‘development’,1 has raised new a rich body of interdisciplinary scholarship. questions about anthropology’s relationship to Anthropologists studying women have been, development. Despite its a ention to power, and continue to be, central to that project, both however, the emergent critique of ‘develop- as promoters of gender equity and critics of ment’ has not engaged adequately with femi- development. Development has also been an nist anthropology or feminism more generally. important theme in anthropological research This paper therefore considers the possibilities more generally, although anthropology’s re- for feminist perspectives in the anthropology of lationship to development has been charac- ‘development’. Drawing on fi eldwork in rural terized by ambivalence and passed through Mexico, it explores the challenges and contra- several distinct phases. Anthropologists, like dictions of such a project, including pressures feminists, have contributed to the elaboration for engagement and disengagement. Anthropology in Action, 18, 1 (2011): 16–28 © Berghahn Books and the Association for Anthropology in Action doi:10.3167/aia.2011.180104 Feminism and the Anthropology of ‘Development’: Dilemmas in Rural Mexico | AiA The discussion presented here refl ects the material poverty of some regions and coun- current moment, when many feel the momen- tries, leading to the creation of development tum of feminist activism and research around agencies and assistance programmes. development assistance has slackened. Al- By the early 1970s, as the limitations of a though gender equity remains a goal of many purely economic view of development became organizations and individuals, the means to evident and as decolonization proceeded, social advance feminist initiatives may not be as scientifi c disciplines turned their a ention to evident as they once were. And while almost the problems of the new nations. Development two decades ago di Leonardo concluded that theory became an important site of engage- ‘Feminist-inspired anthropological research ment for anthropologists, feminists and politi- and writing on gender relations … has come cal activists. Anthropologists began working of age’ (1991: 1), I have seen a jarring disjunc- as researchers and employees of development ture between the centrality of gender issues in agencies, drawing a ention to the cultural di- debates about ‘development’ in rural Mexico mensions of development policies and projects – indeed the vitality with which gender roles and contributed to theories of socio-economic and ideologies are lived and contested in ev- change. Similarly, feminist scholars, activists eryday life there – and the scepticism within and development workers drew a ention to some quarters of anthropology about research the implications of socio-economic change for that uses an explicitly feminist framework, women and challenged development organi- addresses development issues, and works to zations to make gender equity a priority in all communicate its results beyond disciplinary their work. This shi from an economic to a boundaries. Countering this, I argue that con- broader understanding of development, how- ducting feminist anthropological fi eldwork on ever, was not uniform and, as a result, led to a development in a ‘Third World’ se ing charac- multiplicity of competing understandings of terized by hierarchies not only of gender, but the term. also of class, ‘race’ and ethnicity, is a critically At present the term is used in two broad important and timely intellectual and political ways by scholars: the fi rst, to refer generally challenge, and that the issues it raises are cen- to socio-economic change; and the second, tral to the discipline. to refer to the policies, projects and practices Before presenting issues that arose in my of national governments, international bod- research project and addressing current chal- ies, multilateral or bi-lateral aid agencies and lenges, I will briefl y describe the histories of NGOs working towards, well, ‘development’. feminist and anthropological engagements with This paper focuses on this second meaning, development, beginning with a clarifi cation while recognizing that even within this fi eld about the term itself. the term’s meanings are multiple and shi ing. Multiple Meanings of Development Feminist Engagements with Development Development, in the sense the term is now It was fi rst pointed out decades ago that men used, began a er the Second World War. Both and women almost always have very diff erent the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe and the relationships to development. The beginnings post-war planning of colonial empires were of the feminist critique of development are models and impetus for the creation of a global usually traced to the publication of Boserup’s project of ‘development’ that drew primarily Women’s Role in Economic Development in 1970, on economic theory. The absence of develop- and its articulation of concern about wom- ment came to be the dominant explanation for en’s exclusion from development activities. | 17 AiA | Julia E. Murphy Coinciding with the emergence of second- WID and GAD have been. Cornwall, Harrison wave feminism in industrial countries, the text and Whitehead argue that although GAD helped make ‘foreign aid’ a site for feminist approaches ‘facilitated the dedication of re- engagement in donor countries (Snyder 2004; sources, the production of policy spaces, the Rathgeber 2005).2 creation of a cadre of professionals and a body Since the 1970s feminist engagement with of organizations of various kinds whose work development has become a wide, well-devel- is to deal with issues of gender’ (2007: 5), they oped interdisciplinary fi eld. Multiple actors reduced ‘the political project of gender and and actions have formed what some have development … to a “technical fi x”’ (ibid.: 9). referred to as a ‘women/gender and develop- In the late 1980s Sen and Grown (1987) pre- ment movement’ (Snyder 2004), while others sented perspectives of southern women, drew refer to international networks of diversely a ention to the intersections of race, class situated researchers and activists that have and nation with gender, and popularized the participated in struggles for ‘voice, represen- term empowerment. This work paralleled the tation, and resources’ within development recognition by feminist anthropologists that (Cornwall, Harrison and Whitehead 2007: 2–3). their analyses should more fully account for Feminist anthropologists, like other feminist the ways in which gender intersects with other scholars, have aimed to improve women’s lives forms of inequality in shaping women’s lives through the production and dissemination as well as power imbalances among feminists. of knowledge, in addition to their contribu- Another fi eld of action, the women’s hu- tions to activism, advocacy and development man rights movement, appeared a er the UN practice. Di Leonardo noted how ‘Feminist General Assembly adopted the Convention on anthropologists, especially those working in the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Latin America, joined with feminist historians against Women (CEDAW) in 1979. Rights-based and other social scientists to create a massive approaches have been particularly successful and contentious fi eld focused on “women and in drawing a ention to women as citizens and development”’ (1991: 21). in claiming public space for women, and have Early eff orts to transform development lead to positive legal reforms in some regions were fi rst framed in terms of what came to (Molyneux 2007: 235). They have also helped be known as women in development (WID) to transnationalize women’s movement activ- and focused on the integration of women into ism, facilitating links among international, development. This approach was later criti- national, regional

Load more