The evolving role of women as nation builders

The foundation of society is built on human relationships, profoundly shaped by a mother’s influence. A mother’s behavior plays a pivotal role in shaping her child’s future interactions and values, establishing a lasting legacy of trust and cultural memory that enhances social connections within families, friendships, and professional circles.

As the primary caregiver, she is instrumental in teaching acceptable behaviors, often with limited external influences. Beyond her biological role, women are crucial in cultivating human capital, which is vital for national ambitions, such as achieving economic leadership.

Mothers serve as lifelong educators, significantly affecting their children’s emotional, psychological, and social growth, which is essential for a thriving society and national advancement. Homemakers juggle various responsibilities, enabling primary earners to concentrate on their work and creating a nurturing environment. In households lacking this support, family members must adapt, underscoring the importance of these dynamics for societal health and progress.

The term ‘housewife’ has been present for centuries with its earliest use being recorded in the year 1225. whereas the word ‘homemaker’ is relatively newer, being traced true back to somewhere in the 1860.  It is ironic to describe a homemaker as dependant on earning members, when, in reality the household’s functioning depends substantially on the homemaker.

The earning members are in fact solely dependent on the homemaker but alas, this reality does not receive the acknowledgment it deserves. Stereotypes suggest that women who stay at home do not significantly contribute to the household compared to their working husbands.

However, these homemakers engage in unpaid domestic tasks like cooking, cleaning, managing finances, and caring for children and the elderly. This unpaid labor enhances the household’s quality of life and leads to financial savings. In reality, homemakers contribute equally, if not more, to the household’s well-being.

The issue of unpaid work burden on women has gained attention since the 1990s, yet there is limited empirical evidence on its effects on women’s economic and psychological well-being in low- and middle-income patriarchal societies. Unpaid care work restricts providers’ choices and time, leading to negative employment impacts, reduced self-care, and adverse health effects.

Globally, care needs are primarily met through unpaid household labor, disproportionately affecting women. As populations age and the demographic dividend declines, the demand for unpaid care work is expected to rise, exacerbated by insufficient public care infrastructure. This situation is likely to increase women’s care burden and perpetuate gender inequality, hindering inclusive development goals.

As far back as 1920, a hundred-and-four-years ago, the noted economist Sir Cecil Pigou, in his work The Economics of Welfare observed:– “… the services rendered by women enter into the dividend when they are rendered in exchange for wages, whether in the factory or in the home, but do not enter into it when they are rendered by mothers and wives gratuitously to their own families. Thus, if a man marries his housekeeper or his cook, the national dividend is diminished.”

This idea has since engaged the attention of economists and sociologists, consistently. Viewed from the lens of both fields, its undervalued nature, is a common strand, whether it be tasks that are considered ‘everyday’ such as cooking, cleaning and other similar activities that undoubtedly support the paid workforce by enabling economic productivity, yet they are in themselves not recognised as productive activities for the purposes of measures such as GDP. 

India has one of the highest levels of gender disparities in the world in paid and unpaid work  The country is characterized by strong patriarchal norms and lack good quality public care infrastructure and services that compel women to primarily take care of household work and restricts their labor market participation.

To put the enormity of what is missed out by these conventional methods, it may be noted that every day, around sixteen billion hours individual are devoted to unpaid domestic work and care. On an average, women perform 2.6 times more unpaid caregiving/domestic work, even when they are otherwise contributing economically.

This one-sided scenario is probably one of the reasons why the country has low female labour force participation at 31.7%, since the societal framework generally presumes such responsibilities to be automatically falling upon women. Women’s unpaid caregiving work is estimated to contribute 15 – 17% of India’s GDP, yet it remains unpaid and unrecognised. 

The adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2016 marked a significant shift by explicitly including and measuring unpaid work, particularly under SDG 5, which focuses on gender equality. Target 5.4 emphasizes the need to “recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work,” with indicator 5.4.1 requiring measurement of the time spent on such tasks.

This inclusion reflects the efforts of feminist scholars and activists who sought recognition for the daily contributions of women, which have often been undervalued and linked to traditional gender roles. By keeping unpaid work outside production boundaries, it has remained unmeasured and unvalued in national accounts, affecting planning and policy.

According to the National Statistical Office’s report “Time Use in India-2019,” which is the country’s first Time Use Survey covering 138,799 households from January to December 2019, significant gender disparities are evident.

The findings reveal that women dedicate an average of 299 minutes daily to unpaid domestic work, while men spend only 97 minutes. Additionally, women spend about 134 minutes on unpaid caregiving, compared to 76 minutes for men. Overall, women allocate 16.9% of their day to unpaid domestic tasks and 2.6% to caregiving, whereas men contribute 1.7% and 0.8%, respectively.

Efforts to highlight the undervaluation of homemaking include two main approaches: the replacement cost approach, which evaluates the economic implications of hiring domestic help, and the opportunity cost approach, which considers the income lost by those who manage the home.

This undervaluation stems from entrenched gender roles.

Acknowledging the worth of homemaking transcends mere financial assessment and challenges societal views on value. There has been a shift in language, with “homemaker” replacing “housewife” to better capture the diverse roles of married women.

However, the term “housewife” still dominates, with a prevalence ratio of 4:1. It’s important to note that men can also take on homemaking responsibilities, and their contributions deserve equal recognition, regardless of the circumstances that lead to this role reversal. 

The Supreme Court has recently acknowledged homemakers as “nation builders” in the Shishupal @ Shish Ram v Surjeet case, determining that their unpaid domestic work should be compensated at a minimum of Rs 30,000 per month in cases of road accident fatalities. This recognition highlights the importance of valuing unpaid care work and calls for societal changes through public services, infrastructure, and social protection policies that promote shared household responsibilities.

The existing gender disparities in unpaid caregiving significantly impact women’s well-being, labor market participation, and overall life satisfaction, ultimately hindering gender equality and economic progress. To address these challenges, it is essential to recognize the value of unpaid work and redistribute its responsibilities.

By investing in care infrastructure and utilizing time-use analysis in policy-making, we can ease the burden on women, aligning with the UN Sustainable Development Goals for gender equality and inclusive economic growth. In conclusion, acknowledging and valuing unpaid work is not just a matter of fairness; it is a crucial step toward achieving a more equitable and prosperous society.

END OF ARTICLE