Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
New Woman Foundation
The Value of Women’s unpaid Housework in Egypt
Dr. Salwa El-Antery
2
Index
Introduction 2
Chapter 1
Houseworkin Economic Thought 5
Chapter 2
International Experiences to assess the Value of Un-paid Domestic work 21
First: Measuring Unpaid housework hours 21
Second: monetary estimation of Unpaid housework 24
Third: Measuring and valuation of Unpaid housework in Egypt 25
Fourth: Main Impact of Measuring and Estimation of Women’s Unpaid Housework 27
Chapter 3
Methodology for measuring and estimation of Egyptian women’s unpaid housework 39
Chapter 4
Applying Methodology and Analysis of Results 49
Conclusions and Recommendations 72
References 81
Statistical Appendices 85
3
Introduction
Women in Egypt are accused of being reluctant to participate in the economic activities. Official data
and reports repeat over and again that women’s participation in the Labour power does not exceed
22%, which is one of the lowest in the world. The prevailing terminology referring to unemployed
women is “settled at home” implying that women outside the market are indulged in a state of
relaxation and leisure, despite the actual reality, where these women are swamped for long hours in
house chores and that may not have enough time to rest.
This study aims to assess the actual value of Egyptian women’s participation in the economy through
measuring and estimating the amount of unpaid housework of these women. According to the
National Accounting System that all UN member states abide by, the unpaid housework work is
excluded as it is not considered an economic market activity. This means that a god amount of
women actual participation in economic activities, despite its importance to the welfare of the
community as a whole, remain unrecognized or valued, and that the total participation of women in
economic activities is underestimated, which in itself negatively impacts women’s social status and
their ability to participate in decision making.
There is a variety of studies on Egyptian women and labor market, yet there is rarity in economic
studies addressing measuring and distribution of housework within the family. Partly, this could be
explained by novelty and limited availability of data on time use in Egypt. The first trial in this
regard is the Economic Research Forum (ERF) study published in June 2010, “Rethinking Time
Allocation of Egyptian Women”. The study focused on measuring women’s working hours on
housework and the impact of marriage in increasing this type of work and reducing the time
available for paid work. To our knowledge, the study is the first trial ever, to estimate the monetary
value of women’s housework in Egypt, and its percentage of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
The study is divided to four chapters. The first, deals with the concept of un-paid housework and the
evolution of economic thought and national statistics’ systems with regards to this kind of work. The
second chapter reviews international experiences to measure and estimate the value of un-paid
domestic work and their results. The third chapter is dedicated to explaining the methodology used to
measure and estimate women’s housework in Egypt. The fourth chapter presents the results of using
the methodology, and provides recommendations
4
This trial to estimate and acknowledge the value of women’s unpaid housework in Egypt, is by no
means a call for limiting women to housework, or going back to concepts that have been transcend
by humanity whether at the level of social development or at the level of economic thought and
analysis. Those concepts are based on preset division of labor and fields of activities, and had the
presumptions that market paid labor is men’s domain, whilst unpaid houseworkis women’s domain.
Estimating the value of women’s houseworkin Egypt, in our view, represents an essential step in
estimating the overall actual economic participation of Egyptian women compared to the overall
economic participation of men, as an objective basis for enhancing women’s social status, and their
right to participation in decision making, and in achieving balance between social responsibilities
and work. We hope this trial will be an effort to build upon at different levels; research, feminist
movements and national statistics.
On a personal level, I would like to express my deep appreciation for the New Woman Foundation
for taking the initiative to address such an important issue. I am also indebted to the ERF for
allowing me to use the raw data of the labor market follow up survey. My thanks to Mr. Khaled
Maher program developer in CAPMAS for his invaluable help on how to deal with the survey data
using the STATA program.
5
Chapter 1
Housework in Economic Thought
Unpaid housework concept entails all services which are being produced and consumed for
free within the family; i.e. services provided by family members to each other, house chores,
preparation and providing meals, purchasing needed supplies, transportation of family members to
different places, care for the sick and older family members, etc, of such services that are primarily
carried out by women.
Unpaid housework resembles many paid labor activities in the community, e..g. domestic
services, child and geriatric care, some nursing activities, yet, contrary to the paid services, unpaid
housework is not included within the GDP according to the System of National Accounts (SNAs),
prepared by the United Nations and is applied to different world countries,1
In fact the SNAs is only concerned with goods and services which have market value. It can
be said that the GDP value is derived mainly from the sum of all market values of all goods which
are produced and sold in the market; and all services that are paid for. Even when there are goods
and services that are not actually exchanged in the market; but could be sold and have specific price,
then it can be included in the national accounts through specified “estimated value”, as is the case
with the amount of the harvest kept by farmers for family consumption (subsistence economy), or the
estimated rental value for the residential home . But, housework services and all community
voluntary services are not included in the GDP2
The system of national accounts (SNA) acknowledges that all housework activities are economically
productive, and that the time used in it enhances community welfare3 However, there are some
factors that make it hard to integrate these services in the GDP is that the production and
1The most recent document in this regard is the UN document on Systems of National Accounts 2008. It was prepared
under the auspices of the United Nation, European Commission and OECD, IMF and the World Bank Group. It was an
updating of the SNA 1998 in response to the UN Statistics Committee request; the committee adopted unanimously the
SNA 2008 as the International Statistics’ Standard for national accounts, and urged world countries to collate its national
accounts and report on it according to this system
2 Previous source page 63
3 Previous source page 70
6
consumption of these services is not linked with monetary flow, thus does not help analyzing what
might happen with regards to economic inflation or recession. Including such non-monetary
transactions would obscure what is actually happening in the markets, and limits decision maker’s
ability to take appropriate measure. On the other hand, the labor power statistics define
economically active persons as those who are participating in the production process as defined in
the SNA. If the definition is extended to include the production of personal services provided by
family members for their own consumption, then all persons involved in these activities would be
considered as employed, making unemployment impossible from a theoretical point of view.
Hence, “the need to restrict the production limit in the SNA and other statistical systems to market
activities or fairly close alternatives to market activities”4
According to this concept, we have two important issues. First, part of the community production is
not taken into consideration i.e. the total production in different societies is under estimated. Second,
directly relevant to the subject of this study, huge big part of women’s actual participation in
economic activities, despite its importance to the community welfare, remains unacknowledged and
its value is not calculated resulting in underestimation of the total women’s participation in economic
activities. This in itself negatively impacts women’s social status and their ability to participate in
decision making
The economic thought had addressed the issue of unpaid housework, particularly for women, in a
number of key trajectories; the capitalist, Marxist and feminist economic thought, and issues related
to preparations of national accounts.
First: Evolution of the preparations of national accounts,
and position from women’s unpaid Housework
Declaring that women’s unpaid housework as a non-productive labor is associated with the
developments in preparing national accounts in England and the United states of America late
nineteenth century.5
The issue was settled by 1890, when a parliamentarian committee was
established in England to improve the preparations of national censuses. The Committee resorted to
4 SNA 2008 page 63
5 For detailed presentation of this evolution see Nancy Folbre, The Unproductive Housewife: Her Evolution in
Nineteenth Century Economic Thought, Journal of women in Culture and society, the University of Chicago, 1991, p.
465-478
7
the famous economic thinker Alfred Marshal who noted that the number of “none working”
population in the censuses in England was much higher than the numbers in the censuses in
Germany. The reason, was the inclusion of persons economically dependent on others within that
category (children, sick, older persons and married women devoted solely to housework), and that
the proper classification for this group of population should be as “dependants/un-independent”,
similar to what was already being used in Germany’s censuses. In 1891, England’s census included
unpaid married women in the “dependants” category, referring that all unpaid housework of women
has been excluded, and if these activities were included the percentage of working women would be
close to the percentage of working men.6
Envisioning housework as none productive and considering women as economically un-independent
was gradually adopted also in censuses in USA (second half of the nineteenth century) and was
finally settled in the 1900 census. The census affirmed that the “bread winners” category does not
include retired persons or wives and daughters who live in the household and their work is limited to
helping in unpaid housework. Thus, daughters and wives were included in the “dependants”
category.7
Naturally, the feminist movement in the second half of the nineteenth century in both England and
USA contested the exclusion of women’s housework from population censuses. Most prominent in
these contests in England was the efforts of the National Women's Suffrage Association (NWSA) to
make alliances with some progressive Chambers of Commerce to adopt the point of view of NWSA
members that “the theoretical concept that a wife who bears a fair share of the burdens of common
life is being fed by the husband is a destruction for the whole community”8
In USA, the Association of the Advancement of Women (AAW) presented an official memorandum
to the Congress 1878 contesting neglecting the work of12 million American women and considering
house wives as non-productive laborers, because they are not paid for their work. The memorandum
called upon the Congress to include women in the censuses under the category of productive
laborers9
By the beginning of the twentieth century, using term the “dependants” to categorize married women
who do not work for wages outside the house became as settled scientific fact. Women’s economic
dependency became the argument to justify their low wages; women do not need wages for survival,
6 Nancy Folbre, IBID, p. 474
7 Nancy Folbre, IBID, p. 477
8 Elizabeth Blackwell, Cited in William Leach, True Love and Perfect Union, New York, 1980, p. 193
9 Nancy Folbre, IBID, appendix, p 483.
8
but men have the right to ask for higher wages because they sustain their wives. If Alfred Marshal
was the first to explicitly exclude housework from the economic accounts, however, this trend was
further crystallized by his student Arthur Cecil Pigou, the champion of welfare economies thought,
who defined the National income as the value of producing all goods and services that can be
purchased directly or indirectly by money. To further explain, Pigou gave his famous example, if a
house keeper works for a single young man and then married him, the national income will decline,
since she will have to conduct all her previously paid service for free after marriage!10
the mainstream trend in the late nineteenth century was to exclude women’s housework from
population censuses. However, some of the economists participating in the early trials to assess
the GDP in Sweden, England and the USA, during the first half of the Twentieth century, tried to
include unpaid houseworkin the national accounts and assess its value.11
In Sweden, Erick Lindahl, Einar Dahlgren and Karin kook estimated the value of unpaid
houseworkas 32% of Sweden’s GNP in 1929. In USA, Simon Kuznets from the National Bureau of
Economic Research declared that exclusion of the family labor from the National Income estimates
seriously limits the validity of these estimates, and that such estimates will not be sound unless the
data is improved or total disappearance of the family as a producer of goods.12
Kuznets estimated the
value of family production as 35% of the GDP in USA in1929 13
. In England 1958, Colin Clark
criticized the prevailing System of National Accounts emphasizing that the continued exclusion of
household production is untenable, and estimated the value of this production by about 27% of GDP
for England in 1956.14
The Most recent trial to integrate unpaid housework in the national accounts came within the
framework of in-depth analysis of the shortcomings of the current indicators, particularly GDP, for
measuring economic performance; the significant report prepared by three of the contemporary
10
A. C. Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Macmillan and Co. Limited, London, 1932 [1978], p. 32
11
See detailed presentation of these experiences in: Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory
About Everything: Domestic Labour in Neoclassical & Marxian Economics, Women's Economic Policy Analysis Unit,
Curtin University of Technology, August 2001, p. 8 - 11
12
Kuznets was awarded the Nobel Prize 1971 for his work in measuring national income. - Simon Kuznets, National
Income and its Composition, New York, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1941. p. 11 13
- Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 9 14
Collin Clark, "The Economics of Housework", Bulletin of the Oxford University Institute of Statistics, 1958, p. 205-
211
9
economic academicians known as the Stiglitz Commission Report 200815
The report emphasized
that it is due time to move from focus on economic production performance to measuring quality of
human life. It clarified that the level of the quality of life (or welfare) is determined by a group of
factors represented primarily in the material standard of living (income, consumption and wealth),
health, education, employment, political participation, social relations, and current and future
conditions of natural environment. Further, the report stressed that traditional measurements of
economic performance, particularly GDP, doesn’t take most of these factors into consideration.
Within the context of shifting focus towards quality of human life, the report provided an important
group of recommendations, most noted is the recommendation to extend the spectrum of national
income indicators to include non-market activities.
The report clarified that the staring point in this regard would be availing consistent information on
how people spend their time every day, that could allow comparisons among countries, and
throughout different time periods. It also called for providing comprehensive, independent, and
periodic accounts on the domestic activities16
On another level, the international feminist movement was heading the same way and calling
for developing methods of evaluating unpaid Housework and integrating it in subsidiary
complementary accounts to the national accounts. The demand was crystallized in the Beijing
Declaration of the Fourth World Women Conference 1995, which called upon governments and
academic and research institutions to conduct studies to evaluate women’s unpaid work and
disseminate the results as part of the mechanisms to address the phenomenon of feminization of
poverty17
Eventually, the process of developing national statistics lead the UN statistics’ commission to
acknowledge the need to prepare satellite accounts to the national accounts, specifically for the
unpaid housework statistics, and that such accounts should include the following data:18
15
This Commission was established upon the request of the French President Nicolas Sarkozy 2008 with the beginning
of the global financial crisis to identify shortcomings in the GDP as an indicator of economic performance and social
progress, and to clarify the additional information that might be required to produce more meaningful indicators of social
progress. The Commission included 25 economics professors from a number of esteemed universities and scientific
institutions, under the leadership of both Joseph Stiglitz and Amartya Sen Nobel Prize in Economics and Jean-Paul
Fitoussi. See: Report by the commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress,
www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr 16
Stiglitz Commission Report. IBID page 14 17
Summary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Minnesota advocates for Human Rights, January 1996,
p. 9& 20.
18
United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, Seminar on measuring the
contribution of women and men to the economy, New York , 28 February 2013.
10
Average hours spent on unpaid housework segregated by sex (setting apart, whenever
possible, domestic chores from child care activities)
Average number of hours spent on paid and unpaid labor (total labor burden) segregated by
sex
The statistics’ committee defined the unpaid labor as follows
- Housework activities
- Caring activities
- Community work/volunteering
Second: Unpaid housework in the economic capitalist thought
It can be argued that the main contribution of the national accounts pioneers, in highlighting the
monetary value of housework carried out mainly by women and emphasizing the need to integrate
domestic production in the economic analysis; came in a time when the capitalist economic thought
completely ignored housework. As long as this work is not considered productive, why should
economic thought and analysis be occupied with? And if women are economically are not
independent and depend on husbands to support them how, from an economic point of view, can we
talk about benefits gained by husbands, not to mention community, the wives’ housework. Thus,
until mid twentieth century, it was settled exclude housework from the circles of economic analysis
and thought. This lead to the Separation between two spheres; the “private sphere” related to
housework carried out by women, and the “public sphere” related to paid market work, and which
Alfred Marshal launched his term dependants to decide women’s position in the national statistics,
where he warned against increasing salaries of working women, because this might persuade them
to ignore their house duties19
, i.e. their natural work!
The credit for regaining interest in housework in the economic capitalist thought in the first
half of the twentieth century, goes to a pioneering group of women academics. Hazel Kirk, Margret
Reed and Elisabeth white’s academic research emphasized the importance of the time taken in the
household production and consumption. Their research criticized the mainstream economic thought
analysis of living levels being limited only to goods and services that Can be bought or sold in the
market20
19
Nancy Folbre, The Unproductive Housewife: Her Evolution in Nineteenth – Century Economic Thought, Journal of
Culture and society, The University of Chicago, 1991, p. 467
20
Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 13
11
The big step in integrating housework in the neoclassic economic theory was in the mid sixties
by the American economist Gray Stanley Beaker21
. Beaker published an article 1965, “A Theory of
the Allocation of Time”. He emphasized that the family resembles a small facility where capitalist
goods, raw materials and work are used to provide cleaning and food services and create useful
goods. This small facility doesn’t differ from market facilities except in only one aspect, the
working hours depends on family members choices and not to the monitoring of facility owner22
According to Becker, family members spend their time daily and the goods they get from the
market in varying activities and in different proportions, to produce goods that provide direct
satisfaction of their needs23
It could be said that Becker’s article clearly impacted the economic
thought and analysis throughout the seventies of the twentieth century. This lead Theodore Scultz24
to speak of the birth of a new economic branch, New Home Economics, which is occupied with
production, consumption, child rearing, human capital investment and time distribution between
house work and paid work.25
The best expression of the current Capitalist economic thought towards house work is Amartya
Sen’s works, Nobel prize winner in Economy. Sen emphasizes the importance of paid work in the
marker ass the way to support women’s liberation; stating that women’s ability to decide freely on
issues of reproduction and child rearing and changing the gender based division of labor; is linked to
their freedom to paid work outside the house. Having independent income enhances women’s social
status within the family and in society26
. Sen also stresses the difference between policies and
measures which aim to enhance welfare and quality of life for women, through elimination of
discrimination and achieving better life conditions, and those polices and measures which support
women’s agency. In the first, women are at the receiving end while the second kind of polices
makes women an active party seeking, by themselves, to achieve social and political changes that
would improve the lives of both women and men.
However, this automatic correlation between women’s work in the market and their liberation
and enhanced status in society was criticized by feminist economists. Marilyn Waring asserted that
the System of National Accounts is an essential tool for the masculine economy. She confirmed that
21
Gray Stanley Beaker won Noble Prize in Economics 1992 for his valuable contributions on family economy as a
branch of economic sciences 22
Gray S. Becker, "A Theory of the Allocation of Time", Economic Journal, 1965, p. 496 23
IBID, p. 495 24
American Economist, Nobel Prize winner in economics 1979 25
Theodore Scultz, "The Value of Children: An Economic Perspective" in Therese Jefferson & John King, Never
Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 16
26
Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom, New York, Anchor Books, 1999, p. 194
12
to measure the impact of increasing women’s work in the market on the economic welfare, there is a
need to take into consideration not only the increase in the total national production due to women’s
entering of the labor power, but also whether working women would continue carrying out house
work, or if the burden of such activities will be transferred to other individuals within the family27
This feminist approach might be the background of the Stiglitz commission’s recommendations
(2008) on reforming economic performance indicators. The recommendations stressed that it should
be taken into consideration the balance between working hour and rest hours, and that there is a
difference between getting specific standard of living by working 1500 hours, and getting the same
standard by working 2000 hours28
Third: Unpaid housework in the economic Marxists thought
The traditional viewpoint of the economic Marxists thought towards unpaid housework can be
summarized as follows: Housework embodies the first form of oppression in the history of humanity.
It is unproductive, even pathetic, idiotic and draining. The way to women’s liberation is their
involvement in the productive paid work in the market. The Capitalist system’s evolution should
ultimately lead to the disappearance of housework due to increasing commodification of many house
chores which will be provided through the market. In the Socialist system, women will be freed from
such activities as the state will be responsible for providing it.
By the end of the end of the nineteenth century, Engels wrote that the first form of oppression
in the history of humanity corresponded with the emergence of oppressive relation between men and
women through marriage; and that the first class oppression is men’s oppression of women. These
two types of oppression can only be overcome in the socialist society. As the means of production
are transferred to public ownership, the individual family will stop to be an economic unit in society,
and housework will be transformed from private business to community industry. Child care and
education will be public concerns.29
The socialist thinker, August Bible, emphasized that housework is a waste of time and an
expression of backwardness, and as such will inevitably disappear, a matter that is already
happening in capitalist states due to increasing Commodification of life. Most of the activities
27
- Marilyn Waring, If Women Counted: New Feminist Economics, Harper Collins Publishers, Paper pack Edition, 1990. 28
Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, OP. Cit. www.stiglitz-
sen-fitoussi.fr 29
Friedrich Engels, The Origin of the Family Private Property and the State, 1884, Moscow , Progress Publishes, 1972,
p. 76.
13
traditionally carried out by women could be acquired from the market at a lower price and a better
quality. Furthermore, houses are equipped with many electronic devices to get the housework done,
and thus the materialist conditions for women's emancipation have been created by the evolution of
capitalism itself. It will reach its goal with the achievement of socialism, and then the housework
will disappear at the end.30
At the Beginning of the Twentieth century, Rosa Luxembourg saw that paid female workers
enjoy economic independence and provide, similar to men, their community with productive work.
But women’s work in child rearing and house chores is not productive, though it helps men’s modest
salaries to cover family needs. As long as Capitalism and the system of paid work is prevailing,
then only work that provides surplus value is considered productive work. Luxembourg emphasized
that women’s political equality has to be rooted on solid economic grounds, i.e. their paid work. Paid
work, trade unions and socialist democracy had all lead to the advancement of working women away
from the stifling limited existence and pathetic idiotic tasks of running the house31
In the Soviet union, during the first half of the Twentieth century, housework was seen as the
main obstacle to women’s full emancipation. Vladimir Lenin wrote that despite all women’s
liberation laws, they continue to be house slaves, because the housework crushes, suffocates,
devaluates and ties them to the kitchen and nursery, and wastes their work on overwhelming,
drudgery and draining tasks32
It was natural that the 8th
Communist Party Conference, 1919, voted
for replacing housework with collective measures for housework services and child rearing.
However, many years passed by, without achieving these measures in reality. What happened in the
SU is that women were demanded to do two work shifts every day; one paid in the market, the other
unpaid at home.33
Looking down at the housework as nonproductive continued till the end of the fifties and
beginning of the sixties. In 1959, the Polish Marxist thinker, Oskar Lange wrote explaining the
difference between “natural economy” and the cash commodity economy. The first, including
housework, aims to fulfill the direct satisfaction of needs, while the second is a rational activity with
regards to both the aim or the tools of this activity.34
30
August Bebel, Woman under Socialism, 1879, Translated by Daniel de Leon, New York, Labor News Company, 1961,
p. 187
31
- Rosa Luxemburg, "Women's Suffrage and Class Struggle" in Dick Howard, Selected Political Writings of Rosa
Luxemburg, 1912, New York, Monthly Review Press, 1971, p. 216 - 221 32
Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 27
33 - IBIB.
34 Oscar Lange, Political Economy, Volume I; General Problems, New York, Macmillan, 1963.
14
Fourth: Feminist economic thought
Feminist literature in social sciences attracted attention to women’s housework. By the
seventies, it was settled that women’s housework represents an apparent real work. Main efforts in
this realm were focused on the injustice of the distribution of housework chores among men and
women.35
However, feminist economic thought was much developed further to provide a comprehensive
theory on women’s unpaid housework. This came mainly through the feminist Marxists as from the
seventies of the twentieth century, by Margaret Benston, Annette Cohen, Bonnie Fox, Roberta
Hamilton, Michelle Barrette and others.
In 1969, Margaret Benston, building on traditional Marxist thought, emphasized that the roots
for women’s second class status is in fact economic, and that women are different than men in their
relation to means of production. In reality, housework belongs to “pre-Capitalism” since it is about
the production of simple usable values, and not salable “commodities”. Benston saw that women
work outside the monetary economy, and their work has no value, and hence it’s not real work, but
more of slaves and villagers work. Benston specified two requirements for women’s emancipation to
be realized: the first is equal opportunity with men to work outside the house; the second is to
transform the housework into work that belongs to public sphere through assuming social
responsibility for child care, providing collective places for food, and collective washers. She
pointed out that the availability of these two conditions could not be imagined under Capitalism; on
one hand, women’s unpaid housework was not as profitable to be an incentive for the production
tools’ owners to invest in that field; on the other hand, the capitalist economy was not capable of
rapid expansion enough to provide jobs for all women. Unlike traditional Marxist thoughts, Benston
felt that women housework will not eventually disappear under capitalism.
As from the seventies of the twentieth century, a gradual elaboration of a Marxists feminist
theory on housework was on the making. Its main aspects were:
a) Housework is a productive work
35
Christine Delphy, Close to Home: A Materialist Analysis of Women's Oppression, University of Massachusetts, 1984,
p. 16
15
Feminist Economic thought saw views of earlier Marxists on housework as unproductive work,
were reflecting male bias in the mainstream Marxist thinking. Housework just like paid work in
the capitalist system result is production of an added value, and so it has to be paid for.
Housework could be seen as “indirectly” productive, since it provides necessary inputs for
production and reproduction of an essential capitalist commodity, i.e. human labor. The goods
men buy with their wages need further work to be transformed to usable food, clothes and
housing. This work is done by women, and it contributes in the reproduction of the labor power
needed for the capitalist class.36
Feminist economic thought paid special attention to the middle class women’s role in
contribution to child education. The schooling system presumes the presence of parents’ helping
their children to study at home. Mothers are the ones who take on this task. Businessmen benefit
directly from this work as it impacts the induction of the labor power they utilize afterwards. 37
b) Value Law applies to housework
The value law simply points out to the producers’ strong inclination to adopt the most efficient
production methods (low cost) under the pressure of competition and the fear of being kicked out
of the market. The question that keeps posing regarding housework; is how to apply the law of
value to it since the married women's products do not enter the market to begin with. If the
housewife herself is the one who manages and organizes her housework, can issues such as the
profit motive or the fear of competitive pressures be considered at all?
The Feminist economic thought response was that the commodities and services provided by
housework resembles, or nearly resembles, commodities and services in the market. Since
women (and men) are faced with financial limitations requiring the efficiency of housework as is
the case with production for the market, it means that the value law applies too to housework.38
c) Housework produces value, and women are being exploited
Feminist economic literature tried to explain the differentiation between men and women
regarding housework. It used both capitalist and patriarchal theories. They pointed out that men
36
Wally Seccombe, The Housewife and Her Labour under Capitalism, New Left Review, 1974, No. 83, p. 3- 24 37
Loree A. Primeau, A Woman's Place: Unpaid work in the Home, The American Journal of Occupational Therapy,
November 1992, p. 984
38
Wally Seccombe, Reflections on the Domestic Labour Debate and Prospects for Marxist-Feminist Synthesis, 1986, p.
200
16
as a capitalist class and as husbands are the ones who receive the surplus value resulting from
women’s unpaid housework. The capitalist class become able to pay law wages for male workers
because of the role women play in providing meals, cleaning services, washing, child rearing for
free to men. Without these free services, men would have asked for higher wages, and thus
capitalist would bear higher cost.
Men as husbands get the surplus value of women’s work as they enjoy a higher standard of living
compared to what they would get if their wives were fairly paid for their housework. Men,
through the marriage institution limit women’s ability to enter the paid work market, which
emphasizes women’s economic dependency to men.39
d) The Dynamic relation between housework and Capitalism
Marxist feminist economic literature points out to the dynamic relation between women’s
housework and capitalism. One the one hand women’s unpaid work leads to devaluation of
men’s working power (as long as the free or very low cost products are provided by women’s
work), and enhances the profits of the capitalist class’s and hence it justifies the continuation of
such free housework.
On the other side, some literature said that women are not exposed to the same degree of
exploitation as those working for salary. Besieged by the exhausting housework, they provide low
quality services and goods which could be provided more efficiently through the market.
Therefore, the capitalist class tries to commodify housework to enable higher rates of exploitation
in this domain.40
. It might be the basis to which the Traditional Marxist thought built its
assumption that capitalism will tend to commodify housework soon.
However, Marxist feminist economic thought didn’t escape criticism; the main criticism
came from the British professor of social economy, Catherin Hakim, who founded the “preference
theory”. According to her theory, men and women have varied choices for life styles. In advanced
societies women’s preferences represent an essential determinant for their life choices, in particular
the choice between focusing on activities related to children and family life, or focusing on career
and competitive activities in public sphere.
39
Heidi Hartmann, the Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: Towards a More progressive Union. In Loree A.
Primeau, A Woman's Place, OP. Cit., 984 40
Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 35
17
Catherine Hakim 41
asserts, based on evidence from field research in the last three decades of
twentieth century in industrial developed countries particularly USA and England, that when women
have open choices. A minority of women focus their choices on paid work, while the majority try to
achieve balance between work and care for the family requirements. The prominent example is
women moving to part-time jobs or changing career or even stopping to work altogether. The
category of women whose choices are focused on the family is also a minority, best examples are
those who give priority to the family and stop working after marriage, unless the and family suffers
financial distress.
On another vein, Hakim stresses that choice of the majority of men are focused on career,
followed by balancing work and family care requirements. Only a few minority of men focus their
choices on family.
Hence, Hakim’s prophecy that despite the increasing numbers of women flowing to the work
market, only few of them will chose to focus on work, and that the majority of women will prefer
achieving balance between paid work and housework to care for the family.
41
- Cathrine Hakim, Women, careers and work – life preferences, British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, August
2006, p. 287-291
18
Chapter 2
International Experiences to Estimate the Value of Un-paid
Housework
UN data points out that many of the world countries became interested in measuring and
estimation of unpaid work as part of its official statistics. 48% of 126 countries included in the
gender statistics program are regularly conducting time-use surveys, which show the citizens’ daily
hours distribution between paid and unpaid work, personal care and leisure. 42% of countries do
measure unpaid work, but only 7% of countries were committed to integrate unpaid work statistics in
Satellite Accounts to the System of National accounts to complete the real picture of economic
development and social progress.42
It interesting that the last group of countries is not limited to
developed countries but includes also some developing countries, e.g. Mexico which assessed
women’s contribution to both paid and unpaid work and included the results in official Satellite
Accounts in 2011. Colombia became 2012 the first country to commit to include care activities to
children, elder and sick people in the National Economy.43
Notably, despite the increasing interest in time use surveys to measure the number of unpaid
work hours, yet, commitment to estimate the value of such work and register it in satellite accounts
is still limited to few states. However, the mere availability of such surveys and its periodic
implementation provides research institutions with basic data that can be used to estimate the value
of unpaid work and its proportion to GDP in different countries44
According to UN, gender statistics for world countries in 2012 show that women spend
longer time in unpaid housework compared to men. The gap is greater in developing countries
compared to developed countries. More important, taking housework hours into consideration
women’s total daily working hours are frequently more than those of men, to a degree that women’s
housework hours could be considered a second work shift45.
42
- United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, Seminar on measuring the
contribution of women and men to the economy, 28 February 2013, New York. 43
- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, "Equal sharing of responsibilities
between men and women, including care giving in the context HIV/AIDS", 12 March 2013 44
UN reports that 34 countries (developed and developing) conducted time use surveys between 2009-2012 . Albania,
Algeria, Australia, Belgium, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Djibouti, Estonia,
Ethiopia, Finland, France, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Ireland, Japan, Macedonia, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, New
Zealand, Norway, Romania, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States. See United Nations, ibid., P
6
45
- United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, OP.Cit.
19
First: Measuring Unpaid Housework Hours
Indicators of measuring women’s unpaid working hours can be specified for each country are based
on OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) Family Database, 46
. This
database has data from 23 countries from developed industrialized countries and Eastern Europe, in
addition to Mexico and Turkey. The database provides an analysis to the use of daily hours in these
countries during the period 1999 – 2008. Daily hours are distributed between paid work, unpaid
work, personal care (including sleep and eating, etc) and leisure, specifying the differential
percentage for each of these domains of the total daily hours. Comparative indicators for men and
women are displayed in table (1).
The main indicators are:
1- Time spent on paid work
Time Spent on paid work represents around 21% on average of the total daily hours for men in
the core47
OECD countries, compared to 12.2% for women.
Data in table (1) confirms that the gap between men and women increases more in developing
countries compared to developed industrialized countries. Men’s share ranges between 30% of
the total daily hours in Mexico to 16% in Belgium. As for women the percentage ranges between
17% in Japan, Latvia and Lithuania and only 6% in Turkey.
2- Time spent on unpaid work
The concept of unpaid work in the OECD database includes both housework and care for the
elderly and children, in addition to voluntary for the community. Table (1) shows that the
average of women’s unpaid work in the core OECD countries is 20.4% of the total daily hours,
i.e. more than double for men 9.8%.
Here too, there is huge disparity among different countries. However, this time it is not just
reflecting the different economic levels, but also seems to be reflecting the socio-cultural
traditions. In Turkey, Mexico and Korea, time spent by women on unpaid work is nearly four
46
- OECD Family Database, "Time use for work, care, and other day-to-day activities", OECD – Social Policy Division
– Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social affairs.
www.oecd.org/social/family/database 47
Originally, in 1964, OECD was formed of 18 European countries in addition to USA and Canada. OECD gradually
expanded, particularly with the inclusion of Eastern European countries. The core OECD countries are: Austria,
Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, England, Ireland, USA, Canada. See www.oecd.org
20
folds of that of men, and three folds in Japan, Poland and Italy. The gap decrease to be only1.5
folds in Sweden, Norway and Finland.
3- Total time spent on paid and unpaid work
Women in the OECD core countries spend, on average, more total working hours daily 32.6%
hours compared to men 30.8%. The table also reflects the impact of economic, social and cultural
factories on both the total work burden on women in those countries of the or the disparity of this
burden between women and men. While women’s total working hours/day amount to around
43% and 39% in Mexico and Lithuania; this percentage is only 28.1 in Belgium and around 29%
in Germany and Norway.
On another level, the discrepancy between men and women regarding the total work load burden
gets higher in the less developed countries as in Mexico, Turkey and Eastern European countries,
while the gap decreases in more developed countries, except for Italy and Canada. The gap
almost disappears in Sweden New Zealand, Germany, Australia and Japan whether due to
substantive participation of men in house chores, because women spend more housework hours
while men spend more work hours in the market.
In conclusion, women on average spend more working hours equal to or higher than men;
however the greater part of men’s work is paid work, while greater part of women’s work is
unpaid work.
21
Table (1)
Average of differential total time spent on work for men and women
In 23 OECD countries 1999 - 2008
Men women State
Total Unpaid
work
Paid
work
Total Unpaid
work
Paid
work
38.0 8.0 30.0 43.2 31.1 12.1 Mexico
33.6 6.2 27.4 34.1 19.7 14.4 Japan
30.8 4.3 26.5 32.8 16.1 16.7 Korea
34.2 10.0 24.2 36.3 19.1 17.2 Latvia
33.7 11.3 22.4 39.0 12.1 16.9 Lithuania
29.4 7.7 21.7 38.2 22.1 16.1 Poland
32.9 11.4 21.5 38.2 17.9 15.1 Canada
34.3 13.3 21.0 37.6 22.8 14.8 Estonia
28.2 7.4 20.8 34.3 24.4 9.9 Italy
33.0 12.7 20.3 33.6 22.5 11.1 Australia
26.3 6.1 20.2 31.8 25.7 6.1 Turkey
31.4 11.2 20.2 32.3 18.2 14.1 USA
31.2 11.1 20.1 32.1 20.2 11.9 UK
31.9 11.8 20.1 31.8 17.0 14.8 Sweden
32.3 12.4 19.9 32.2 20.7 11.5 New Zealand
30.8 11.1 19.7 29.8 16.4 13.4 Norway
31.7 12.2 19.5 33.9 22.4 11.5 Spain
31.9 13.0 18.9 36.1 22.3 13.8 Slovenia
28.9 10.2 18.7 30.8 19.2 11.6 France
29.1 11.0 18.1 30.3 17.5 12.8 Finland
28.6 11.2 17.4 28.9 18.9 10.0 Germany
29.4 12.9 16.5 35.1 22.7 12.4 Bulgaria
26.3 10.7 15.6 28.1 18.0 10.1 Belgium
30.8 9.8 21.0 32.6 20.4 12.2 Core 18 OECD countries
This table has been compiled by the researcher from the OECD Family database.
OECD Family Database: "Time use for work, care, and other day-to-day activities", OECD –
Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social affairs.
www.oecd.org/social/family/database
22
23
Second: monetary estimation of Unpaid housework
Due to the divergence among world’s countries official efforts in terms of monetary valuation
of unpaid work and its percentage of GDP, as well as the different valuation methods; it is difficult to
compare countries. We will use the OECD study on valuation of the monetary value of unpaid work
in 25 of its member countries. The study covered the age category 15-64 during 1998-2009, and was
published 2010.48
The study calculated the average number of unpaid working hours in each country and
estimated its monetary value according to the payment/hour in the specific country. It used two
alternatives in this regard49
. The first, is the average payment/hour at the national level, as an
expression of the wage for alternative work chance where this time could have been spent. The
second, is the average payment/hour in the informal sector, considered as the minimum wage usually
paid for housework services, i.e. wage of non specialized (generalist), which covers most of the types
of housework. Table (2) provides the country level estimations.
Table (2) points out that using the alternative opportunity, unpaid work ranged between 38%
and 75% of GDP in Hungary and UK respectively. Using the minimum wage in the informal sector;
unpaid work ranged between 19% and 53% of GDP in Korea and Portugal respectively.
The study show that by using the simple average of both estimation methods, we reach a
conclusion that the value of unpaid work represents a percentage that ranges between 33% and 50%
of the GDP in the 25 OECD countries included in the study. Certainly, this is a huge percentage
impacting the people’s standard of living in those countries, yet it is not included in its National
Accounts.
It is worth noting that although the study affirmed the conclusions of similar studies and
surveys, i.e. that women spend longer hours than men in unpaid work, yet the study, when
evaluating this unpaid work, didn’t look into the shares of both women and men and the percentage
of each of their contributions in the GDP.
48
- OECD, Cooking, "Caring and Volunteering: Unpaid Work Around The World", OECD Social, Employment and
Migration Working Papers, No. 116, 2010. 49
Different recognized alternatives for assessment of unpaid work will be addressed in details later when explaining the
methodology used for Egypt.
24
Table (2)
Measuring the value of unpaid work in OCD Countries as a percentage of GDP
1998 - 2009
According generalist
market replacement
cost
%
According to
opportunity cost
%
State
19 45 Korea
20 44 Canada
21 48 Norway
22 40 Poland
24 42 Mexico
24 55 USA
24 51 Netherland
26 50 Estonia
28 44 Belgium
30 59 Sweden
31 48 Austria
31 55 Germany
32 56 Finland
32 53 Ireland
34 75 UK
34 57 France
36 52 Italy
36 38 Hungary
38 39 Slovenia
38 62 Denmark
40 54 Spain
41 58 Japan
42 60 New Zealand
45 60 Australia
53 61 Portugal
Source:
OECD, Cooking, "Caring and Volunteering: Unpaid Work around the World", OECD Social,
Employment and Migration Working Papers, Paper No. 116, 2010, P. 29& 30.
25
In addition to comparative studies to estimate unpaid working hours and its value within the
OECD, one of the interesting studies sponsored by the UN and published 2012, is the study of
unpaid work in China50
. Study results confirmed conclusions of similar studies in the west. It
clearly showed that unpaid work consumes nearly 47.1% of women’s daily hours, compared to 20.
2% of men’s daily hours. It also indicated that the Chinese women’s average total work hours (paid
and unpaid) is 58 hours/week compared to only 52.6 for men.
The study estimated the value of unpaid work as ranging between 29.4% - 31.3% of GDP.
Once again, this estimation was not differentiated according to sex to value women’s total
contribution in the economic activity and its impact on the community’s standard of living.
Third: Measuring and valuation of Unpaid housework in Egypt
Despite the wealth of studies on Egyptian women in the Labor market; at the level of
economic analysis, there is immense rarity of studies which address measuring and valuation of
housework within the family. This, in part, is due to the limited and recent availability of specific
data on time use. The study published by the Economic Research Forum (ERF), “Rethinking Time
Allocation of Egyptian Women”, is probably the first one published on the subject 2010.
The study 51
, focused on measuring the hours women spend on housework, and the impact of
marriage and having children on increasing this type of work and decreasing the time available for
paid work. According to the study, the average number of housework hours/week for women are
20.8 hours for unmarried women with no children, compared to 32.5 hours for married women with
no children and 51.7 hours for married women with children52
. . the study didn’t compare the burden
of housework for both men and women since the data on time use where only limited to women and
children at that time. As for the valuation of the monetary value for unpaid housework, its
percentage to the GDP or estimation of the total contribution of women to the economic activity in
Egypt, there are no previous studies to our knowledge.
50
- UNRISD, United Nations Institute for Social Development, "Gender Pattern and Value of Unpaid Work" – findings
for China's first large scale Time Use Survey, October 2012. 51
- Rana Hendy, Rethinking Time Allocation of Egyptian Women: A Matching Analysis, Economic Research Forum,
Working Paper No. 256, 2010. 52
- Rana Hendy, IBID, p. 18
26
Fourth: Main Impact of Measuring and Estimation of Women’s Unpaid
Housework
Results of measuring and estimation of unpaid housework in different world of countries
clarified the great contribution of unpaid work towards the community welfare, and that women are
carrying the bigger burden of such work. Time use surveys showed the higher total working hours
for women compared with men, and consequently the lower rest and leisure hours they get. This
enabled feminist movements in different world countries to demand the right to a balanced life
responsibilities/work ad that such responsibilities should be redistributed among men and women in
the family. Further, such results supported demands for equal pay, particularly that one of the
traditional arguments usually raised to prefer that women should be the ones who take maternity
leaves, or even leave their work totally, is that women usually receive less wages.53
and consequently
it is better for the family that the man continues working because he provides a bigger wage.
Taking into consideration that child rearing represents a public service and human investment
for the whole community, not only the family, women’s demands received some responses. The
responses varied in its degree and extent from one community to another, whether at the level of
redistribution of child care responsibilities among men and women, or the stat interventions to carry
some of these burdens, as well as creating “family friendly” work environment. Some improvements
were also achieved on the way to “equal pay for equal work” for men and women. The trend to
acknowledge the right of women to share the wealth accumulated during marriage based on
considering it as the result of joint effort of which the housework is part. Following is a brief
account of the main steps achieved in these domains in different countries of the world:
1- Redistribution of housework responsibilities in the family:
we can say that the main focus in this domain was focused on changing laws and regulations
related to child care leave, to increase the involvement of men in child care and reform and
house work in general.
Some countries provide a paid short “paternity leave” for fathers when a child is born (3-4 days),
as the case of Greece, Korea and Netherland . However, in some countries the “paternity leave”
is a long one, 20 weeks, as in the case of Portugal where the father receives 51% of the wage54.
53
- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, "Equal sharing of responsibilities
between men and women, including care giving in the context HIV/AIDS", 12 March, 20013, p. 3 54
- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labour and Social Affairs,
"Key Characteristics of Parental Leave Systems, May 2014, p. 2
27
In addition to the maternity leave, many countries allow the father, the mother or both to get a
child care leave (full or part-time). Payment for such leave is for the family as a whole, and thus
is paid for only one of the parents. In most OECD countries, parents are allowed to decide who
of them will take the leave, as well as the possibility for exchanging between themselves. Some
third world countries are beginning to adopt such measures; Chile, since 2011, had allowed
mother to transform a percentage between 50 – 66% of child care leave to the father 55
.
In order to ensure that women are not the only ones who carry this burden, some countries
specify a quota of the child car leave for fathers that can’t be transformed to mothers, so if it is
not used by the father the family loses it. This quota is 3 months in Iceland56
. In 2002 Sweden
extended the Child care leave to 480 days; of which 60 days are allocated for each parent and
cannot be transformed, and in 2008, they created the “Gender Equality Bonus”, a financial
award, given to families when both parents use the child care leave beyond each one’s quota.
The maximum amount of the bonus is given to parents who equally share the leave57.
2- Reforming Laws on wages and Pension for women and Child care allowance
Improving the wages’ situation for women require two things: first, eliminating biased forms of
discrimination in wages and second, raising minimum wages. Jobs receiving minimum salaries
in most of the world, particularly domestic services, are frequently taken by women.58
Some countries provide important examples for enhancing wages situation; Brazil gradually
increased minimum wages, Zambia and Chile adopted LO recommendations on domestic
servants and specified minimum wages 59
and Sweden issued a nondiscrimination act (2009)
which had binding measures to ensure equal pay for men and women in all facilities that have 25
workers or more 60
.
Also, some countries increased maternity leave e.g. Netherland, where the leave was doubled
from 13 to 26 weeks61
. . Other countries provided compensatory benefits within the pension to
compensate parents for unpaid periods incurred for child care as in the case of France62
.
55
- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, OP. Cit, p. 3 56
OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labour and Social Affairs,
IBID, p. 2 57
- Statistics Sweden, Women and Men in Sweden - Facts and Figures 2010, p. 41 58
Gender statistics in Sweden show that women represented 87% of workers in housework and personal services in
2008; and that these jobs received the lowest wage among different jobs on the salary scale average. It also showed that
women even in housework services received slightly less wages compared to men. See: Statistics Sweden, OP.Cit, p. 67
59
- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, OP. Cit, p. 4 60
- ILO, Global Employment Trends for Women 2012, p. 42 61
- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, OP. Cit, p. 4 62
- UN commission on The Status of Women, IBID, p. 4
28
3- Community pre-school Child care:
Some countries tried to consolidate community involvement in carrying some of the burden of pre-
school child care, a matter that helps to ease women’s burden of housework and gives them a greater
opportunity to join the labor market. Table (3) shows the main forms of community participation.
a) Care provided for children under 4 in certified nurseries’:
This service is provided by the government in many countries of the world. Parents pay a
fee for the service, which is usually deducted from taxes of the family, or be reimbursed
later through governmental cash subsidy, or others means to ensure governmental bearing
the costs of such care. Examples include many advanced industrial countries such as
Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France and Germany, and also some third world countries as
Mexico and Chile, who focused such service on poor families63 In Mexico Governmental
nurseries provide free care for children of working women, for families whose income is
less than the minimum wage. In Chile, 2009, the government launched a program to
establish 3500 Child care free centers for families in the category of the 40% least income
population.
b) Day Care for children at home:
In case of unavailability of enough places in the formal nurseries or if the parents wish that
the child is raised in a “domestic environment”, child care services are provided by
specialized person at their homes, or at the children homes, but the number of children
should not exceed 3-4 children. Despite what may come to mind that such services are
usually provided by the private sector, in many countries in the world offer such services
are provided by the government. Table (3)
c) Kinder gardens
Except for Japan, all developed industrialized countries are keen that their government
play the leading role in the provision of care services in kinder gardens whether full-day or
part-time. kinder gardens prepare children for formal schooling through integrating
educational programs by 50%, and are supervised by professional educators.
63
- UN commission on The Status of Women, IBID, p. 4
29
Table (3)
Community responsibility for Pre-school Child Care in OECD Countries
Kinder gardens In the family Nurseries State
Public Private Private Australia
Public Public/private Private Austria
Public Public/private Public Belgium
Public Private Private Canada
Public Public Public Cyprus
Public Public/private Private Czech Republic
Public Public Public Denmark
Public Public Public Finland
Public Public Public France
Public Public Public Estonia
Public Public Public Germany
Public Public Public Greece
Public Public Public Hungary
Public Public Public Iceland
Public Public/private Private Ireland
Public Public Public Italy
private Private Private Japan
Public/private Public/private Public Korea
Public Public Public Luxemburg
Public Public Public Malta
Public Public Public Mexico
Public Public/private Private Netherland
Public/private Private Private New Zealand
Public Public Public Norway
Public Public/private Private Poland
Public Public/private Private Portugal
Public Public Public Slovenia
Public Public Public Spain
Public Public Public Sweden
Public Public/private Private Switzerland
Public Public/private Private Turkey
Public Public/private Private England
Public Private USA
Source:
OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labour and
Social Affairs, Typology of Children and Early Education Services, December 2010, p.
30
4- Child Care beyond schools hours:
Providing such services is one of the ways by which some governments support working parents to
achieve balance between work and life. it is still in its early stages. It covers mainly pupils in
primary schools, and in few case preparatory schools. Italy is almost the only case where students in
secondary schools are also covered by such services. Table (4)
As clear from table (4), services provided to pupils include activities before or after schooling hours.
It may also be extended frequently to include activities during the holidays, as the case in Austria,
Canada, Denmark, Hungary, Malta, Korea, New Zealand, Portugal, Slovenia, Romania, and UK.
Table (4)
Main Systems for Child Care outside Schooling Hours in OECD Countries
Activity Child
Age
State
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 3-11 Austria
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 0-6 Belgium
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 5-9 Canada
Activities after schooling hours 3-12 Cyprus
Activities after schooling hours 3-14 Chic
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 6-11 Denmark
Activities after schooling hours 6-11 Estonia
Activities before and after schooling hours 7-11 Finland
Activities before and after schooling hours 3-11 France
Activities before and after schooling hours 5-11 Germany
Activities before and after schooling hours 5-11 Greece
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 6-11 Hungary
Activities after schooling hours 6-17 Italy
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 3-11 Malta
Activities during holidays 6-11 Japan
Activity package after schooling hours and in holidays 6-11 Korea
Activities before and after schooling hours 4-12 Netherland
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 5-11 New Zealand
None Available 3-11 Poland
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 3-11 Portugal
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 3-11 Romania
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 6-14 Slovenia
Activities mainly before schooling hours 3-11 Spain
Activities before and after schooling hours 6-11 Sweden
Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 0-14 UK
Source;
OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labour and
Social Affairs, Out – of – school – hours Care Services, p. 3
31
5- Sharing Wealth between couples when Separated:
The principle of sharing wealth between couples was established in the twentieth of the last
century in both Soviet Union and Scandinavian countries64
. The goal at that time was to protect
the weaker party in the marriage institution, i.e. the wife, where the mainstream thinking was that
mean are the bread winners and the women are economically dependants. However, it became
more settled with the increasing number of women entering the labor market, the increasing
tendency of economic thought to acknowledge the importance of domestic work and its impact
on the family welfare, and with the escalating demands of the feminist movements to take such
work into consideration and measuring and publicizing its value and contribution to GDP. Now,
the principle guiding the laws of countries which approved the sharing of wealth by the divorced
couples is that such wealth is the result of the joint work of both couples of which the domestic
work represents an essential part.
It is noted that the increasing trend to enact the wealth sharing principle takes different forms in
different countries, that could be summarized as follows:
a) Division of Wealth between Spouses in Europe
|Separate Property system
UK is the famous example for this system, where each spouse has his/her independent
property during marriage, and the court is to decide how to share these properties in case of
divorce.. The law had specified the basis on which the court should apply. These include
“each party’s contribution to the family welfare, including housework and care for the
family”. Despite the fact that it is up to the court to decide the percentage each party should
have, yet the main trend is 50% for each party. In a ruling 2001, the judge confirmed that
“the property should always be equally unless, and only within limits, there is a good reason.”
This was further confirmed by a famous ruling 2002 “it is unacceptable to specify a greater
value for the bread winner contribution compared to the home maker”65
.
Deferred Community of Property system
The famous examples of applying that system were in Norway, Denmark, Sweden,
Germany, Austria and Greece. Despite the specificity of the national laws applied in each
country in this regard, yet they all share a common feature: the separation of spousal
64
- EJCL, Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, Matrimonial Property in Europe – A Link between Sociology and
Family Law, Vol. 12, December 2008, p. 2
www.ejcl.org 65
- EJCL, Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, Matrimonial Property in Europe, OP. cit., p. 3
32
property during marriage, and the division of wealth equally between them when they
divorce. Some exceptions to the principle of parity include exclusion of what one of the
spouses gets through inheritance, donation, the practice of his/her profession, and in case
of short-term marriage.
In Norway, for example, the marriage Act provisions issued in 1991 recognizes the
spouses' shared ownership of the house purchased during marriage, on the basis that
there is an indirect contribution of the wife in financing the property through her
provided child care and housework, and/or her contribution to family expenses. Such
contribution establishes her right, even if the husband had bought the house with his own
money66.
In Germany, at divorce both spouses provide a list of the increase of her/his property and
wealth and this increase is divided equally between them67.
And in Greece, both spouses had the right at divorce to claim division of profits of the
other party’s property which s/he thinks that s/he had contributed to it. The law takes into
consideration all direct and indirect contributions including: housework, professional
help, psychological support, creating conducive family environment, providing ideas and
improving social relations that positively impacts the other spouse and enhances her/his
professional work. The law assumes that each spouse’s contribution, to begin with, is at
least one third of the other party’s profits and gains68.
Limited Community of Property
France, Italy, Spain and Croatia present famous examples of the system based on shared
spouses’ ownership of the wealth during the marriage, and its equal division at divorce.
France applies the principle of shared property on the couple together, and at divorce,
the court has the authority of dividing the shared property in a way that provides for
equal standard of living for both parties. The law allows the conversion of real estate
property from one spouse to the other as a form of compensation69 .
In Italy, the law stipulates the joint ownership of the spouses of all transferable or
otherwise property of the family during marriage, regardless of whether they have been
66
- IBID, p. 4 67
- IBID, p. 5 68
- IBID, p. 6 69
- IBID, p. 6
33
purchased jointly or individually. However, the law excludes property, which any of the
spouses gets through inheritance, donation, the practice of his/her profession. At divorce
the joint ownership ends and each party has the right to 50% of the family's assets.
In Spain, the law stipulates the joint ownership of the couple. At divorce financial
compensation is to be provided to the party, who was responsible housework or worked
for the other party without pay or for low pay70.
In Croatia the Family Law (2003) stipulates shared property of all property and its
income gained by any of the spouses through work during marriage. The law stipulates
that the intended “work” can be individual or joint, direct or indirect, and that indirect
work includes child care and housework and moral support. At divorce, wealth is divided
equally between the spouses unless they have agreed otherwise.
Universal Community of Property
Netherlands is the only country applying this system. The system considers that the
shared property of the spouses during the marriage includes all assets acquired prior to
and during marriage, except what any of the spouses gets through will, inheritance or
social insurance pension. Unless there is a prior otherwise agreement each spouse has the
right to an equal share of the common wealth at the end of the marriage71.
b) Dividing wealth between Spouses in Canada
Each states in Canada has its own law with regards to sharing wealth between spouses.
These laws are based on the assumption that property debts of any of the spouses during
marriage should be shared equally72.
c) Dividing wealth between Spouses in South Africa
According to law 88/1984 on the ownership of matrimonial wealth and its amendments,
spouses can agree that upon divorce, the party whose wealth had not increased or minimally
increased during marriage, has the right to claim 50% of the difference in the increase
between the two wealth73
.
70
- IBID, p. 7 71
- IBID, p. 8 72
- Family Justice Service, Matrimonial Property – General Information, Alberta, Canada
www.albertacourts.ab.ca/fjs/selfhelp/FJS_Property_married_12.pdf 73
- Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984 , Judicial Matters amendment Act 66 of 2008.
www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/1984-008.pdf
34
d) Dividing wealth between Spouses in Malaysia:
In Malaysia there are two laws; one for non-Muslims and one for Muslims. However, studies
shows that the difference is mainly about terminology and not the content and nature of the
legal texts. (e.g. using the Arabic word Talak to refer to divorce)74
.
According to both laws, upon divorce, the court has the authority, to divide the assets the
spouses get during marriage through any of the spouses’ individual efforts, or to sell these
assets and divide its revenue between the two parties. The court takes into consideration
contributions of the other party who didn’t have asset to the family welfare through caring for
the house and the family. T court is free to chose the type of division, but in all cases the
party who owns the asset gets a bigger share.
e) Dividing wealth between Spouses in Morocco and Tunisia:
The sharing of matrimonial wealth in both countries is based on the principle of independent
individual financial responsibility but allowing the spouses to make an agreement regarding
the division of matrimonial wealth. In 1998, Tunisia passed an Act which acknowledged the
joint ownership of wealth, provided prior agreement of the spouses within the marriage
contract, or under a separate agreement. At divorce, the common property is specified and
divided between the spouses.75
In Morocco, the family Code (2004) provides for the
independence of financial responsibility for each of the spouses. The division of matrimonial
wealth requires a , are not sharing their wealth after divorce except under certified agreement
between them independently of the marriage contract.76
74
- Dr. Norliah Ibrahim et al., The Wrights of the Wife to Claim on a division of Matrimonial Property after Dissolution
of Marriage: Malaysian perspective, Faculty of Law, International Islamic University of Malaysia.
www.childjustice.org/index.php/component/edocoman/?task=document.viewdoc&id=226&Itemid=468 75
Law 94/1998 (dated 9 November 1998) concerning shared property between spouses
www.e-justice.tn/fileadmin/fichiers_site_arabe/droits_homme/legisl_nat/femmes/L_1988_94.pdf 76
The Mudowana Al Ausrah (family Code) 703/2004
www.ugtm.ma/siteugtm/pdf/codefamille_ar.pdf
35
Chapter 3
Methodology of Measuring and Estimation
of Egyptian Women’s Unpaid Housework
The starting point to measure and assess the value of unpaid housework for any community is to
calculate the hours spent on such work, then provide monetary estimates according to wage/hours
for similar work in the market. Counting housework hours is based on the data from time use
surveys prepared by the official statistics bodies to calculate the average daily (and annually)
housework hours. This would then be applied to the number of population (men/women) in the
working age category. Following is an explanation of how this applies to the Egyptian case.
First, the concept of unpaid housework
According to the UN statistics committee unpaid work includes:
Housework
Caring
Community work and volunteering
As we notice, this concept is adopted by all studies and statistics which measure and assess unpaid
housework, whether in advanced industrialized countries or some of the Third World countries
headed by China77
However, time surveys’ data in Egypt does not address activities related to
community or social activities. hence, and due to the lack of necessary data on such activities, the
concept of unpaid domestic work in this study is limited to domestic and care services.
On the other hand, SNA’s concept of unpaid housework excludes any economic activities that are
practiced at home for the purposes of the market (paid clothes’ sewing, preparing meals for sale,
77
see System of National Accounts 2008, the introduction of the Arabic version, and Ministry of Planning website
www.mop.gov.eg
- United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, Seminar on measuring the
contribution of women and men to the economy, 28 February 2013, New York.
- OECD, what is household\s Non – Market Production worth?, OECD economic Studies No. 18, spring 1992.
- OECD, Cooking, "Caring and Volunteering: Unpaid Work Around The World", OECD Social, Employment and
Migration Working Papers, No. 116, 2010.
- Malika Hamdad, Valuing Households' Unpaid Work in Canada, 1992 and 1998: Trends and Sources of Change,
Statistics Canada, May 2003
- Statistics Sweden, Men and Women in Sweden: Facts and Figures 2010.
- UNRISD, United Nations Institute for Social Development, "Gender Pattern and Value of Unpaid Work" – findings for
China's first large scale Time Use Survey, October 2012.
36
family enterprises, breeding animals and poultry to sell in the market ... etc.). It also excludes any
portion of the agricultural and livestock production intended for sale in the market that is kept for
direct consumption in the family (the subsistence economy).
Accordingly, we have specified the main groups of housework forms within the scope of this study
as follows:
- Preparing food and drinks
- Cleaning, organizing and care for the home
- Washing dishes
- Washing and care for clothes (ironing, sewing, mending)
- Caring for plants and the garden
- Fetching water
- Fetching and/or preparation of fuel
- Breeding poultry for family use
- Preparing butter and cheese for family use
- House maintenance
- Cleaning, maintenance and repair of durable goods for the family
- Purchase of family and house supplies
- Care for elderly and sick family members
- Child care
Second, the time use data in Egypt
Time use data in different countries are collected by the official statistics’ bodies through periodic
surveys. In Egypt these data were first available in 1998, through the Egyptian Labor Market Panel
Survey (LEMPS). It is periodically carried out by the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and
Statistics (CAPMAS) in cooperation with Economic Research Forum (ERF). In the 1998 and 2006
surveys’ data on time use was only limited to women and children only. However, the new cycle in
2012 included children, women and men. Data from 2012 survey will be used in this study, to assess
the unpaid housework hours, work for the market and total working hours for both women and men
in Egypt, in the age category 15-65 years as specified in the definition of labor force.
It is worth noting that the survey covers an sample of more than 12000 families composed of 49186
individuals. It covers all Egyptian governorates, representing both rural and urban settings. The
survey, also provides data on respondents differentiated by gender, age, level of education, age,
37
marital status, employment status(employed/unemployed), type of work, income, and wealth
indicators (economic level) 78
. In general, the key features of the survey are in accordance with
similar surveys in many advanced industrial countries, in terms of the sample size, the target age
group and taking into account the influence of public holidays and the intensity of housework (e.g.
providing child care while performing a housework activity), as well as the nature of the used survey,
i.e. asking respondents about the time spent on each housework activity during a specific period of
time
According to the questionnaire form, questions and data recording of unpaid housework are divided
into seven main groups, as follows
- Farming activities and animal and poultry breeding for the family consumption including
cutting grass, harvesting, making cheese and butter
- Shopping for the family, including purchasing food, cloths, house necessities, or transporting
family members to their activities
- Construction or maintenance work in the family house.
- Domestic activities including food preparation, washing dishes and bowls, laundry and
ironing, cleaning the house.
- Fetching water, collecting firewood for the oven or any other purposes.
- total dedication to care for children, the elderly and the sick.
- caring for children and the elderly along with other activities at the same time.
Although this division provides a comprehensive list comprising all types of housework activities we
would like to assess, yet it poses some research difficulties;
a) combining child care and care for the elderly in one group
b) Caring activities are not detailed, so that time for specific activities could be separated, e.g.
time allocated to help with homework
c) Combining item for transporting family members to their activities’ locations with the item for
shopping, which means that time spent on taking children to school or the training activities
or repeated visits to a hospital could not be separated
d) Combining fetching water with other tasks in the same item
In our view, data presented as such limits the researcher’s ability to study the relationship between
the declining state's role in providing essential public services, (education, health and clean water)
78
- Ragui Assaad and Caroline Kraft, The Egypt Market Panel Survey: Introducing The 2012 Round, ERF, working
Paper 758, June 2013
38
and the increasing housework burden, particularly in rural areas.
This division also raises the problem of choosing which market wage, to evaluate the value of
working hours spent on the care for children and the elderly: would it be the salary for a nanny? Or
the salary for an elderly companion? How could you evaluate time on helping with homework if
you don’t have separate data on that specific item.
Third, features of the study sample age group 15 > 65 years
The Study focus on evaluation of the value of unpaid work in the age category 15-> 65 years as
specified in the definition of labor force. We used data from LEMPS 2012 to extract time use data
for this age group, and consequently got a sample of 30.065 individuals.
1. Sample distribution according to gender
% Number Gender
49.4 14848 Male 50.6 15217 Female 100 30065 Total
2. Rural/ Urban distribution
Total Urban Rural Gender
Number % Number % Number
14848 49.1 6691 49.6 8157 Male
15217 50.9 6933 50.4 8284 Female
30065 100 13624 100 16441 Total
100 45.3 54.7 Proportional share
3. Sample distribution according to Social Status
Total Females males Status
% Number % Number % Number
7.8 2335 7.4 11121 8.2 1214 Below marriage age 21.0 6304 14.1 2150 28.0 4154 Never married 0.2 72 0.3 43 0.2 29 Engaged 66.1 19863 69.4 10564 62.6 9299 Married 1.2 369 1.8 279 0.6 90 Divorced 3.7 1122 7.0 1060 0.4 62 Widowed 100 30065 100 15217 100 14848 Total
39
4. Distribution of married individuals according to family size
Married individuals were distributed according to the number of family members, rather
than the number of children because the data in the survey on the number of children
belonged to women only. Consequently, comparison between men and women in terms of
the number of housework hours could not be established. Moreover the survey data are
focused only on married women (18 - 49 years) and as such does not cover the whole age
group of our research.
Total Females males Family size
% Number % Number % Number
0.3 68 0.5 57 0.1 11 One person 10.8 2152 11.4 1202 10.2 950 2 18.1 3591 18.4 1944 17.7 1647 3 24.7 4909 24.3 2567 25.2 2342 4
20.9 4142 20.4 2152 21.4 1990 5
25.2 5001 25.0 2642 25.4 2359 More than 5
100 19863 100 10564 100 9299 Total
5. Sample Distribution according to standard of living
Survey data includes a breakdown of the respondents into five ascending groups each
representing 20% of the total respondents, according to the wealth score index. To translate
these five levels to the poor and the average level and the wealthy, I resorted to the population
decimal division by expenditure used in the “Income, Expenditure and Consumption
2012/2013” Study of CAPMAS, bearing in mind that study estimated percentage of
population below the poverty line as 26.3%.
The decimal division of the population is distributed according to the levels of expenditure
as follows:
Population Category % of total Expenditure
Less than 10% 4.1
10% > 20% 5.4
20% -Less than 30% 6.3
30% -Less than 40% 7.0
40% -Less than 50% 7.8
50% -Less than 60% 8.7
60% -Less than 70% 9.8
40
70% -Less than 80% 11.3
80% -Less than 90% 13.9
90% -100 25.7
Assuming that the best situation is where each population segment has similar share of
spending, and taking into consideration the above results of the decimal population
distribution, we translated the survey’s five living standards, and distributed the sample as
follows:
Poor the least 20% of the survey individuals
Poor -Below average 20% - less than 40% of the survey individuals
Lower average level 40% - less than 60% of the survey individuals
Average 60% - less than 80% of the survey individuals
Above average - high 80% - 100% of the survey individuals
6. Sample Distribution according to employment/unemployment
Total Females males Family size
% Number % Number % Number
46.3 13911 17.3 2629 76 11282 Employed 53.7 16154 82.7 12588 24 3566 unemployed 100 30065 100 15217 100 14848 Total
41
Fourth, Methods of Estimating the monetary value of the unpaid housework
hours
There are three main methods acknowledged globally. Each has its theoretical and practical bases;
and has its scientific and applied limits.79
A. Alternative Opportunity Cost
This method builds upon a basic assumption; that the time any person spends on unpaid
housework could have been otherwise spent on paid work (job). Consequently, we can
estimate the monetary value of the housework hours, according to the payment/hour for the
possible alternative job, this person could have. On the theoretical level, significant criticism
of this method is that it leads to the determining unequal pay for equal work. Although the time
spent on house cleaning or food preparation often requires the same effort and skills, whether
performed by an engineer or a simple worker, according to the opportunity cost the engineer’s
payment/hour will be estimated higher, and thus there will be unequal pay for an hour of equal
work.
On the other hand, the alternative opportunity cost could seem a logical method for estimating
the value of housework in case of a woman who has to sacrifice her income and resign or have
unpaid leave for family care. However, the matter gets harder when using this method to
evaluate housework value for people outside the labor force, e.g. persons on pension, or those
who have never been in paid work that can be used as a basis for estimation. In the latter case,
it will require an assumption for the type of work suitable for the abilities and qualifications of
each person and the payment/hour that s/he might have get.
In addition to such criticisms, undoubtedly this method assumes that the “alternative work
opportunity” suitable for the qualifications, skills and potentials of every person is already
available and accessible immediately and continuously at all times. Yet, such an assumption is
79
For more details on methods of evaluation unpaid housework see:
Ann Chadeau, What is Households' Non-Market Production Worth? OECD Economic Studies No. 18, Spring 1992.
- Johnna Varjonen et al., Satellite Accounts on Household Production: Eurostat Methodology and Experiences to Apply
it, Statistics Finland, Working Papers 1/2014.
- Gianna C. Giannelli et al., GDP and the Value of Caretaking: How Much does Europe Care? IZA, Discussion Paper
No. 5046, July 2010.
- UNRISD, United Nations Institute for Social Development, "Gender Pattern and Value of Unpaid Work" – findings for
China's first large scale Time Use Survey, October 2012.
- Malika Hamdad, Valuing Households' Unpaid Work in Canada, 1992 and 1998: Trends and Sources of Change,
Statistics Canada, May 2003.
- World Bank, Valuing Women's Work, World Human Development Report 1992, Chapter 4.
42
far from reality in general, and contradicts with current situation in Egypt in particular, where
unemployment rates are high, especially among women.
B. Specialist Market Replacement Cost
This method assumes that each service of unpaid housework services can be obtained either
through purchasing from the market or hiring someone to do it, and that having these services
for free within the family means saving the money that, otherwise, be spent in the market.
Therefore, the value of each type of housework is calculated according to the average wage for
similar work in the market, i.e. the value of an hour of cooking meals is calculated according to
the average hour wage for a cook in a restaurant, an hour spent on transporting children to
school equals average hour wage for a private driver, and hour spent on washing and ironing
cloths equals average hour wage for a worker in laundry .. and so on.
The main criticism of this method is that it assumes that the productivity of the family member
for the unpaid service at home could be to the productivity of the professional worker in the
market, and that both of them are working in similar conditions, a matter that might not be
logical for many housework activities, at least in terms of the timing of working hours and
supervision on it.
On the other hand, the application of this method requires knowledge of the average market
wage for a huge range of detailed services that are provided freely at home. In practice, it is
difficult to get detailed data on it.
C. Generalist Market Replacement Cost
To overcome the difficulty of asymmetrical productivity and different working conditions in
the family compare to a professional worker in the market, the group of activities related to
cooking, cleaning, washing, ironing, taking care of the house and the purchase of supplies ...
etc. Is valued according to the market average wage of a housekeeper, on the grounds such
work is precisely carrying out most of these services (except for educational assistance).
Similarly, a nanny’s average wage would be used to value working hours spent on child care
43
and the average wage of the elderly companion to assess the time spent in the caring for the
elderly.
Theoretically, some views call for specifying higher wage for educational support as it
represents specialized work on the one side and it provides a public service for the community,
which is the formation of the human capital.
Chosen methodology for valuing unpaid housework in Egypt
Experiences of different countries and conclusions of different studies in terms of estimating the
value of housework indicate that the choice of remuneration eventually depends on available data.
Yet, in all cases, the specialist market replacement method is excluded since it entails detailed data
on wages in a large list of business. In the case of Egypt, and in the light of the available data, we
resorted to the selected following:
1. For the alternative opportunity cost:
we used the average wage for both women and men at the national level as an expression of
the alternative opportunity cost.
2. for the Generalist replacement market wage:
Theoretical and empirical literature had indicated the importance of distinguishing between all
housework activities on the one hand, and the work on care for the child, the sick and the
elderly on the other hand. In consistence with the above, we searched for the generalist
replacement wages for each group of these activities within available data., we have noted the
following:
a. unavailability of official data on working hours and wages of domestic servants,
nannies and elderly companion
b. CAPMAS data on working hours and wages according to economic activities, includes
data on “individuals in the sector of domestic services for private families”, which are
the wages that can be used to value the house work. However data available from
CAPMAS stops at 2007.80
c. More recent data on working hours and wages according to activity sectors integrates
the sector of “domestic services for private families” within the “activities on other
80
CAPMAS, annual Statistics Book for the Egyptian Arab Republic 2013, work statistics, table 1.9.4
44
services”, which includes also “regional and international organizations and
institutions”, and “incompletely defined activities”81
or with “other activities for
personal services”82
d. More important, wages level for “other activities for personal services” are considered
very low (less than 3 LE/hour) compare to the average agreed cost in reality83
e. Data on wages in educational services are available, however we opt not to use it in
estimating value of activities on care for the child, the sick and the elderly. One the
one hand this activity is limited to specialized educational services and does not
represent the range of activities under the care for the child, the sick and the elderly.
On the other hand data available are restricted to private sector.
In the light of all the above we decided to use the following wages as an expression of the generalist
replacement methodology, a) wages for food and accommodation as alike for housework, and b)
wages for health and social work activities as alike for care for the child, the sick and the elderly
81
IBID table 2.9.4 82
CAPMAS, annual newsletter on employment, wages and working hours’ statistics. 2012 table 2and 2013 table 1.1 8383
CAPMAS, annual newsletter on employment, wages and working hours’ statistics. 2012 table 2and 2013 table 2
45
Appendix for Chapter 3
Main features of the time use survey in Egypt 2012
Compared to surveys prepared according to international standards
The questionnaire Population
number
(million)
Sample size
(individual)
Sample age
group
Survey period State
Questions on activities
during previous week * 82.550 49186 6-64 March – June 2012 Egypt
None available 8.800 12824 6 and above January 2005 - January 2006 Belgium
Questions on 2 days,
one of them during the
weekend
73.641 12655 10 and above April 2001 - April 2002 Germany
Questions on one day
only
37.636 46774 10 and above April 2001 - April 2002 Spain
Record of all activities
during full day
47.231 15441 15 and above February 1998 - February 1999*
Except for 4-18 Aug. and 21 Dec. - 4 Jan.
France
None available 2.115 3804 10 and above February- august 2003
February – October 2003
Latvia
None available 3.454 4768 10 and above January – December 2003 Lithuania
None available 8.206 10792 15-84 September 1999 – September 2002 Hungary
None available 30.904 20264 15and above Beginning of June 2003- end of May
2004
Poland
None available 1.990 6190 10 and above April 2000 – March 2001 Slovenia
None available 4.451 5332 10 and above March 1999 – March 2000 Finland
None available 6.538 3998 20 - 84 October 2000 September 2001 Sweden
None available 53.016 10366 8 and above June 2000 – September 2001 UK
Questions on two
successive days
3.674 3211 9 - 79 February 2000 – February 2001 Norway
Questions on two
successive days
4.298 2739 16 - 74 March 2001 – October 2001 Denmark
Record of all activities
during full day
13.574 6338 12 and above January 2003 – December 2003 Netherland
None available 20.076 17751 10 and above August and September 2000 Romania
I will now ask about family tasks and activities for consumption or services for your family which you did during the
past 7 days, and the time you took for doing them. (individual questionnaire, chapter 4, section 4.3 family tasks during the
past 7 days)
Table Sources:
- Ragui Assaad and Caroline Kraft, The Egypt Market Panel Survey: Introducing the 2012 Round, ERF,
working Paper 758, June 2013
- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division, Directorate of Employment, Labour and Social
Affairs, Time Use for Work, Care and Other Activities, 2011, p. 8
46
Chapter 4
Applying Methodology and Analysis of Results
According to the methodology presented in chapter 3, the weighted average of unpaid housework
hours and work hours for the market for individuals in the sample was calculated as a first step, then
it was applied to Egyptian population and finally the monetary value of the total hours of housework
was calculated.
First, results:
1. Men’s acceptance of providing housework:
Analysis of sample responses, both men and women, in the work age category (15 to less
than 65 years) points out to a marked decrease in the percentage of men who answered yes
when questioned if they have done housework during the previous week compared to women
who answered yes. There was a gap between men and women in accepting practicing
housework in all types of housework, yet it was biggest in case of housework activities (food
preparation, washing dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house) where men
respondent saying yes were only 4.4% compared to 88.6% of women respondent saying yes,
as shown in table (1).
A big gap also between men and women in accepting to do housework when it comes to
caring for children and elderly and the sick in the family. Percentage of men saying yes
ranged between 4-5% compared with 32% women.
The two main areas of housework which seem where both men and women share are
shopping for home (including purchase of food, clothing and household supplies home or
transporting one family members to their activities) and agricultural activities for family
consumption. For shopping 35% of men answered yes compared to 62% of women, while
for agricultural activities (breeding poultry or cattle or sheep, activities for the purpose of
household consumption, including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter, or cheese)
9 of women
It is no surprise. A glance to the respondents’ answers points out what the reality in the
Egyptian community emphasizes of the weak percentage of men who participate in
housework compared to women. What is left concerns the total working hours for both men
and women and its distribution between unpaid housework and paid market work.
47
Table (1)
Number and percentage of men and women who said yes to doing housework
Women Men Type of Work
% number % number 16.0 2440 8.8 1303 farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep, activities for
the purpose of household consumption, including cutting grass,
collecting harvest, making butter, or cheese 62.3 9482 34.7 5151 Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food, clothing and
household supplies home or transporting one family members too
their activities 1.9 285 4.9 723 construction or maintenance activities at family home 88.6 13487 4.4 651 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing dishes and
bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 5.4 819 1.1 160 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven or any other
purposes 32.2 4895 5.3 778 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 32.3 4915 4.0 599 Caring for children and the elderly along with other activities at the
same time 15217 14848 Total number of the sample
Calculated by the researcher from the Egyptian Labor Market Panel Survey ELMPS 2012
2. Average working hours of paid/unpaid work for women and men:
Sample data were used to get the weighted average of weekly working hours of the individual
women and men of the sample. Results emphasize a group of essential phenomena that time-
use data pointed out in different communities:
a. A big gap exists between the number of unpaid housework hours/week between men and
women. According to sample, women’s average unpaid housework hours/week 30.25
hours compared to 4.19 hours/week for men
b. House chore activities occupy the greatest part of women’s time provided in unpaid
housework, where house chore activities take almost 47% of the total time (14
hours/week) compared to 0.27 hours for men.
c. Caring for children, the elderly and the sick is still primarily a women’s responsibility.
The average working hours/week for women in this area counts to 10.47 hours compared
to 0.27 for men. It needs to be highlighted here, when asked about who takes care of their
children when they go to work, female respondents said in 56% of cases women
48
members of the family (mothers, mothers in law, daughters, sisters and grandmothers)
take up this responsibility. 84
Table (2)
Average working hours/week for men and women
Women men Type of work 30.25 4.19 Unpaid housework 1.23 1.10 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,
activities for the purpose of household consumption,
including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter,
or cheese 4.08 1.96 Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,
clothing and household supplies home or transporting one
family members too their activities 0.19 0.20 construction or maintenance activities at family home
13.97 0.27 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing
dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 0.31 0.05 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven
or any other purposes 5.18 0.32 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick
5.29 0.29 Caring for children and the elderly along with other
activities at the same time 6.42 37.01 Working for the market 36.67 41.20 total 15217 14848 Number of individuals
Table was constructed, and averages were Calculated by the researcher from
the Egyptian Labor Market Panel Survey ELMPS 2012
In addition to the common results between the Egyptian case and time-use studies in different
countries, table (2) indicate a set of interesting results. Despite the convergence of the average
work hours of both men and women in farming activities (and animal husbandry and the
preparation of dairy products for the purpose of family consumption), yet women still have a
slightly increased hours It activities of hours of work, there is still a slight increase in the
effort women with an average of 1.23 hours per week compared to 1.10 hours for men. Such
84
Responses of female respondents to question 8113 , chapter 8, section 8.1 female paid work, individual questionnaire
form. ELMPS 2012
49
a result reflects the reality in rural Egyptian settings, where women mainly carry out
activities related to breeding chickens and sheep, milking cattle and the preparation of dairy
products needed for family consumption, as well as contributing to some agricultural
activities, while it is men mainly who carry out agricultural activities, in addition to sharing in
some cattle breeding activities.
Table (2) also indicates the convergence of average house /week spent on house construction
and maintenance by both men 0.20 and women 0.19, despite the prevailing assumption that
such activities are usually done by men, and actually contrary to what similar studies in other
countries indicate that men are mainly responsible for such activities85
As for the paid market work86
sample data point shows that average working hours/week are
37.01 for men compared with only 6.42 for women. This reflects two important things in the
Egyptian context, first, as it Would come to mind, the decreased percentage of working
women (18% of women at the age of labor force) compared to men, 70%)87
; and second, the
increased proportional share of women working at the governmental sectors of total working
women (39% women compared with 23% men)88
; taking into consideration the low average
working hours in both sectors compared to the private sector.89
The official explanation of the decreased participation of women, is that Egyptian women are
reluctant to work and prefer to “stay at home to care for their families after marriage”.90
According to the sample data, when female respondent who didn’t continue their paid work,
what was the main reason for stopping, the first reason was disproof of fiancé /husband
(44.8%), while child care was only 15.5%. Having no appropriate job or proper salary
constituted 17.7% of cases91
. When these women were asked about willingness to go back to
work one day more than 60% answered yes, although this, sometimes, was linked to the need
to work, circumstances or type of available work92
85
See for example, Rachel Krantz – Kent, Measuring Time Spent in Unpaid Household Work: Results from the
American Time Use Survey, Monthly Labor Review, July 2009, p. 49 86
According to the questionnaire form of ELMPS 2012, the concept of work for the market indicates any type of work
with the aim of selling, marketing, getting wages, or any family project with the aim of selling or marketing. See
individual questionnaire form, chapter 4, section 4.1, question 4103, and section 4.4 question 4402 87
Adjusted from CAPMAS data, Annual Statistics’ Book for Egyptian Arab Republic, work statistics, table 4-1, and
population statistics, table 5-2 88
CAPMAS, the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 144 89
Average women’s working hours/week are 53 hours in the public sector and 57 hour in the private sector. See
CAPMAS data, Annual Statistics’ Book for Egyptian Arab Republic, work statistics, table 2-9-4 90
, CAPMAS the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 126 91
Responses to question 1-8120 women respondents 15-45 years ELMPS 2012 92
Responses to question 1-8121 women respondents 15-45 years ELMPS 2012
50
This stresses that “Egyptian women’s reluctance to work”, is no more than a mere lie, and
that the , and indicate that male oppression through the institution of marriage is the main
reason behind women leaving their paid jobs, as well as the difficulty of finding suitable
work or even any kind of work. All this reflects the economic stagnation, and problematics of
finding a decent work particularly in the private sector, in addition to discrimination against
women in employment opportunities.
With regards to employment conditions, women responses to question on the number of
indicated maternity leave they got for their first baby, that 18% didn’t have any paid
maternity leave, for those who got a leave, it was 2-6 weeks for 17% of cases93
. On the other
side, responses indicated that 47% of them work without social or health insurance94
, and
17.5 had no contracts, for those who have contracts 75% have contracts for one year or
less95
. Moreover, more than 70% of them do not have membership in any professional or
labor trade unions 96
As for discrimination against women, official data and reports confirms that men’s wages are
22% higher than women’s in the private sector97
, and discloses that “the majority of the
private sector’s facilities stress in their employment announcements that only men can
apply”98
These report indicate also that unemployment percentage among women is 24.1%
compared to 9.3% among men.99
Despite all factors of male oppression and working conditions deterring to women and
inappropriate to family duties, answers of the respondents in the ELMPS 2012, as previously
mentioned, confirm women’s pursuit of reconciliation between work duties and child care
demands, even if this entails to stop work for some time with readiness to return whenever
they have a chance.
When it comes to the total burden of work, table (2) shows that, on average, women in Egypt
work 36.64 hours/week compared to 41.20 hours for men, i.e. the average total working hours
for women represents 89% of men’s average. A matter that can be attributed on one hand to
93
Responses to question 8109 women respondents 15-49 years ELMPS 2012
94
Responses to questions 5129, 5157, women respondents 15-65 years ELMPS 2012 95
Responses to question 5142, women respondents 15-65 years ELMPS 2012 96
Responses to question 5155, women respondents 15-65 years ELMPS 2012 97
CAPMAS, the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 157 98
CAPMAS, the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 154
99
CAPMAS, results of the labor power research, 2012, page 3
51
the difference in the percentage of employed women, and on the other hand to the increased
proportional share of women working in the governmental and public sectors, and what all
this reflect within the Egyptian context, previously explained.
3. Distribution of average working hours for women and men by region Rural/Urban:
According to the sample respondents’ data, women in both rural and urban areas spend
housework hours that are several folds of those time spent by men. In rural areas women’s
average housework time is around 30.75 hours per week, compared to only 4.50 for men. In
urban areas, women’s average housework hours /week is 29.68 compared to only 3.84 hours
for men ass clear in table (3).
Table (3)
Average working hours/week for men and women in Rural/Urban settings
Urban Rural Type of Work Women Men Women Men
29.68 3.84 30.75 4.50 1- Unpaid housework 0.41 0.27 1.91 1.78 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle
or sheep, activities for the purpose of
household consumption, including cutting
grass, collecting harvest, making butter, or
cheese 4.55 2.16 3.69 1.80 Shopping for the home, including the
purchase of food, clothing and household
supplies home or transporting one family
members too their activities 0.20 0.22 0.19 0.19 construction or maintenance activities at
family home
14.35 0.41 13.66 0.16 Domestic activities including food
preparation, washing dishes and bowls,
laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 0.13 0.02 0.46 0.07 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel
for the oven or any other purposes 4.94 0.39 5.39 0.27 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and
the sick 5.10 0.37 5.45 0.23 Caring for children and the elderly along with
other activities at the same time 7.89 36.91 5.19 37.10 2 - Working for the market 37.57 40.75 35.94 43.60 total 6933 6691 8284 8157 Number of individuals
The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from ELMPS 2012 data.
.
52
The table shows some differences between unpaid housework in rural and urban areas.
Predictably, average hours spent on farming, animal husbandry and dairy products for
household consumption is at least 5 times the time spent on those tasks in urban areas. Also,
average time spent in the rural areas on "fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the
oven or any other purposes," is double the time spent on these activities in urban areas. In our
view, the continued existence of such functions in the Egyptian society reflects, in part, what
official data reveals that 9.2% of rural households and 4.7% of urban households still lack a
source of clean water100
.
On another level, table (3) shows that women in rural areas on average spend longer hours in
caring for children, the elderly and the sick, compare to urban women (10.84 and 10.04
respectively). This, in our view, requires a more detailed distribution of these hours between
child care on the one side, and care for the elderly and sick on the other, to understand the
difference regarding prevailing customs and traditions or the availability of medical
services. We should also take into consideration the nature of provided child care services,
particularly the percentage of educational support when studying time spent on this part of
housework in both urban and rural areas. Unfortunately, the Labor Market Panel Survey data
does not provide all these details.
As for the work total burden, sample data indicate that rural women on average work for 36
hours/week, compared to 43.6 hours/week for men. In urban areas, the average working
hours/week are 37.6 hours for women and 40.75 hours for men. This is a worthy noting result
since it indicates that the average total working hours for rural women is both less than those
for both rural men and urban women. In our view, such result reflects a downward bias to
lowest estimates with regards to rural women working hours for the market, which according
to the ELMPS data is around 5.2 hours/week compared to 7.9 hours/week for women in
urban areas.
This divergence in estimating women's working hours in the market in both rural and urban
areas could be attributed, partly, to the high percentage of women working in the informal
sector in rural areas compared to urban areas, and to the fact that the largest percentage of
women working in the informal sector in rural work without pay. CAMAS data indicate that
70% of women in rural areas are employed in the informal sector, compared to 12.6% of
100
CAPMAS, Annual Statistics’ Book for Egyptian Arab Republic 2013, Population statistics, table 1.6.7
53
women in urban areas101
. It Pepin women currencies in the informal sector in rural 6.62% in
exchange for 3-year only 41% of women working in the informal sector in urban areas.
62.6% of rural women in the informal sector are considered “mainly unpaid workers
contributing in various ways in the family and productive activities", compared to only 41.3
of urban women working in the informal sector.102
It might be that the current type of the survey questionnaire didn’t take fully into account that
aspect of women’s work. Extracted data, for our research sample, indicate that the percentage
of rural working women without social insurance is about 66%, and those working without
contracts is slightly less than 22%. These figures, in our view, is much less than the official
figures about. rural women in the informal sector (70%), as mentioned before.
It should be noted that the survey’s questions define work for the market as” all work for the
purpose of sale or marketing, getting wage, or any family project with the purpose of sale or
marketing”. Although the concept is sound, yet, when the bulk of respondents’ work is for
the family and unpaid, they might get confused whether their work could be counted as work
for the market103
. Not to mention that farming in rural Egypt is predominated by what is
known as the “Muzamalah” (companionship) method, where women help other families in
the village in some of the seasonal farming activities, and women of those families would, in
return, do the same with other women’s families. This part of women’s work is widespread in
rural Egypt.104
, and in our opinion, the specified domains for market labor in the survey fails
to take it into account105
. If such work is calculated, and if all women’s work (paid/unpaid)
in the informal sector are enlisted, we might have different results, and the average total
working hours of rural women might be higher than those for urban women.
101
CAPMAS, the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 147
102
CAPMAS, IBID, page 147 103
Survey organizers admitted that such confusion could happen, and tried to warn interviewers to mistakes that can
happen in this regard. ”the list might lack women working on their own particularly in activities practiced at home, e.g.
selling vegetables, fruits, candy, diary products, eggs, or sewing, embroidery, knitting for others, or handmade cages,
carpets, spinning wool or cotton, etc.
104
See for example, Saqr, Basheer, “Egyptian Farmer does not get bitten twice from the same burrow: On organizational
forms of Farmers’ struggles in Egypt. Studies And Research Center for Labor and Traditional Movements in the Arab
World. May 2010 http://www.ahewar.org/debat/s.asp?aid=216701&t=3 105
The questionnaire specifies 17 work areas which do not include helping others in farming activities. Individual
questionnaire, chapter 4. Section 4.2, ELMPS 2012
54
Table (4)
Average working hours/week for men and women according to social status
Unmarried Married Type of Work Women Men Women Men 13.80 2.88 37.27 5.03 Unpaid housework
0.62
0.80
1.49
1.30
Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,
activities for the purpose of household consumption,
including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making
butter, or cheese 2.14 1.22 4.82 2.41 Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,
clothing and household supplies or transporting one
family members too their activities 0.15 0.14 0.21 0.25 construction or maintenance activities at family home 8.96 0.46 16.37 0.16 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing
dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the
house 0.23 0.02 0.35 0.06 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the
oven or any other purposes 0.73 0.13 7.00 0.44 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 0.97 0.11 7.03 0.41 Caring for children and the elderly along with other
activities at the same time 7.35 28.13 6.56 44.77 Working for the market 21.15 31.01 43.83 49.80 total 2150 4154 10564 9299 Number of individuals
The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from the ELMPS 2012 data.
4. Distribution of average working hours for women and men according to Social Status:
Sample data indicate that marriage increases the burden of unpaid housework for both men and
women, but expectedly, this increase for women is a huge qualitative leap.
As table (4) shows, the average unpaid housework hours per week is 37.27 and 13.80 hours for
married women and unmarried women respectively. Married men also have higher average
hours of housework compared to unmarried men 5.03 and 2.8 hours respectively. Marriage
clearly expands the already existing gap between men and women with regards to housework
burden. The gap between married men and women is seven folds compared to five folds
between unmarried men and women.
The huge increase of average housework hours for married women encompasses all types of
housework, but is mainly concentrated in two items: a) care for children, elderly and sick
55
(more than 14 hours for married women compared to 1.7 for unmarried), and b) Domestic
activities (16.37 hours for mmarried women compared to 9 hours for the unmarried)
In case of men, the increase is mainly concentrated in the average hours for domestic activities
and transportation of family members (2.41 hours for married men compared to 1.22 for the
unmarried men, i.e. double the time). It is interesting that, despite the common perception that
Egyptian men accept to participate in domestic activities, the sample’s data reveals the
opposite. Married men spend less time on domestic activities compared to unmarried men (016
to 0.46 hours respectively). It seems that marriage shifts any burdens men used to carry before
marriage to women!106
On another level, table (4) indicates that the gap between married men and women total work
burden does not exceed 6 hours per week (49.8 hours for men compared to 43.8 hours for
women), whereas it is almost 10 hours between unmarried men and women (13 hours for men
compared to 21.15 for women). this indicates that the huge increase of married women’s
housework compensates for a good part of their decreased work hours in the market compared
to men.
5. Distribution of average working hours for women and men according to number of family
members107
:
Increased family size leads to increased burdens of women’s housework as shown in table (5).
The table points out two important issues. First, the huge jump of housework burden happens
when the family members become 3. The average women’s housework hours increases from
around 13 to 40 hours/week. Assuming that the third members means having a child, this table
underscores conclusions of similar studies that the big increase of housework burden for
married women happens with the first child, then slight increases with the increasing number
of children108
106
To confirm such a relation, requires panel study on a sample of men before and after marriage, a matter that is beyond
the main goal of our current study. 107
Married individuals were distributed according to the number of family members, rather than the number of children
because the data in the survey on the number of children belonged to women only. Consequently, comparison
between men
and women in terms of the number of housework hours could not be established. Moreover the survey data are focused
only on married women (18 - 49 years) and as such does not cover the whole age group of our research. See chapter 3 on
the methodology of measuring and assessment of the value of women’s housework in Egypt.
108
- Rachel Kraft – Krantz, Measuring Time spent in Unpaid Household Work: Results from the American Time Use
Survey, Monthly Labor Review, July 2009, p. 53
56
Second, after certain stage, and with the continued increase of family size, a slight regression
happens in women’s average housework. Table (5) indicates that maximum housework hours
(40.5 hours/week) is when the family members are 4, and regresses to 39.23 hours with the 5th
family member. It regresses again to 37.43 hours when the number of family members is
bigger than 5. This regression is concentrated mainly in: a) care for children, elderly and sick
where it decreases form 16.41 hours (4 family members) to 14 hours (more than 5 family
members) and b) domestic activities where it decrease from 17.29 hours (4 family members) to
15.74 hours (more than 5 family members). This might reflect, on one hand, support from
elder children in caring for the younger members of the family, and, on the other hand,
younger members, particularly girls, carrying out some domestic activities instead of the
mother and grandmother.
It is noted that the increase in family size do not lead to a similar leap in housework burden for
men. As shown in table (5), the slight increase in this burden is concentrated in farming
activities, animal husbandry and preparing dairy products for family consumption. This is
almost doubled, from 1.11 to 2.19 hours when the family size is more than 5 members, which
means that the increase in time spent tends to be in types of work that is in some way or
another are an extension of men’s regular work in the market.
On another level, table (5) highlights an important result; the gap between married women and
men with regards to the total work burden narrows clearly with the increase of family size. At
the level of 4 members family, the average total work hours for women is 48.23 hours; very
near to the average total work hours for men 50.34 hours. The convergence of total work
burden is not attributed only to women’s huge housework burden compared to men, but also to
the tangible increase of average number of hours of women’s work in the market, after the
shock of first child. This average increase from 5.15 hours/week when the family size is only 3
members, to 7.75 hours when the family size is 4 members.
Such a result might reflect that seeking additional income sources to keep up to the increasing
family expenses, and consequently increased working hours for the market, is not limited to
men. Is seems that the increased number of children leads women to work for the market to
face the increased family expenses. This could reinforce what we referred to earlier, 15% of
survey’s respondents emphasized that child care was one of the reasons to stop work; and 60%
of respondents agreed to return to work when there is an opportunity, and if the situation
necessitates.
57
Table (5)
Average working hours/week for men and women according to family size
Type of Work Number of family members 2 3 4 5 < 5
Men
Unpaid housework 4.45 4.62 4.77 4.87 5.96 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,
activities for the purpose of household consumption,
including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter, or
cheese
1.11 0.88 1.00 1.06 2.19
Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,
clothing and household supplies home or transporting one
family members too their activities
2.80 2.30 2.27 2.29 2.55
construction or maintenance activities at family home 0.10 0.24 0.22 0.31 0.31 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing
dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 0.32 0.15 0.19 0.12 0.12
Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven or
any other purposes 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.08
Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 0.04 0.54 0.57 0.54 0.33 Caring for children and the elderly along with other activities
at the same time 0.06 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.38
Work for the market 44.38 45.38 45.57 44.78 43.76 total 48.83 50.00 50.34 49.65 49.72
Number of individuals 950 1647 2342 1990 2359
women
Unpaid housework 12.94 39.93 40.48 39.23 37.43 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,
activities for the purpose of household consumption,
including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter, or
cheese
0.52 1.01 1.12 1.50 2.46
Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,
clothing and household supplies home or transporting one
family members too their activities
2.56 4.72 5.12 5.03 4.54
construction or maintenance activities at family home
0.10 0.15 0.23 0.29 0.19
Domestic activities including food preparation, washing
dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 8.32 16.07 17.29 17.24 15.74
Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven or
any other purposes 0.12 0.27 0.31 0.33 0.52
Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 0.59 9.24 8.36 7.40 6.56 Caring for children and the elderly along with other activities
at the same time 0.73 8.47 8.05 7.44 7.42
Work for the market 5.70 5.15 7.75 7.16 6.41 total 18.64 45.08 48.23 46.39 43.48
Number of individuals ** 1202 1944 2567 2152 2642
The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from the ELMPS 2012 data
. * Does not include 11 individuals, representing number of men in families composed of one person
** Does not include 57 individuals, representing number of women in families composed of one
person
58
6. Distribution of average working hours for women and men according to
Employment/unemployment109
:
Women’s work in the market does not correlate with any decrease with regards to their
housework burdens which continue to be their responsibilities. According to sample’s data
women in Egypt suffer what is known as the double shift work, i.e. one shift in the market
and another at home. Table (6) indicate that women work on average 37.15 hours/week for
the market and around 31.53 hours at home, i.e. a total of 68.68 hours/week compared to
53.60 hours for men.
Table (6)
Average working hours/week according to Employment/unemployment
Unemployed Employed Type of Work Women Men Women Men
29.94 1.95 31.53 4.89 1- Unpaid housework 1.00 0.15 2.33 1.41 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,
activities for the purpose of household consumption,
including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter,
or cheese 3.86 1.16 5.10 2.20 Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,
clothing and household supplies home or transporting one
family members too their activities 0.20 0.12 0.18 0.23 construction or maintenance activities at family home 13.96 0.25 13.94 0.27 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing
dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 0.30 0.02 0.31 0.05 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven
or any other purposes 5.25 0.13 4.84 0.38 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 5.37 0.12 4.83 0.35 Caring for children and the elderly along with other
activities at the same time - - 37.15 48.71 2 - Working for the market 29.94 1.95 68.68 53.60 total 12588 3566 2629 11282 Number of individuals
The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from the ELMPS 2012 data.
109
Married individuals were distributed according to the number of family members, rather than the number of children
because the data in the survey on the number of children belonged to women only. Consequently, comparison
between men
and women in terms of the number of housework hours could not be established. Moreover the survey data are focused
only on married women (18 - 49 years) and as such does not cover the whole age group of our research. See chapter 3 on
the methodology of measuring and assessment of the value of women’s housework in Egypt.
59
The double-shift work phenomenon might have disappeared in developed industrialized
countries110
. This could be attributed to laws and social organization guaranteeing community
participation in child care, and encouraging men’s participation in providing some of these
activities111
, or what the level of economic progress guarantees through the provision of
electrical home devices saving time and effort. However, the situation in developing
countries, including Egypt, is different, and the double shift work is a lived reality for
women.
Table (6) indicates the fact that the total work burden for working women in Egypt exceeds
that of men, the difference is that the greater part of working men work is paid work (91%),
while the greater part of women’s work is unpaid housework (46%). Added to this, as
emphasized through official data, 48% of working women in Egypt, do work in the informal
sector. Moreover, 63% of women in the informal sector are unpaid in both rural 63% or
urban 41% set tings.
7. Distribution of average working hours for women and men according to standard of living
(wealth)112
:
One expects that the increase in the standard of living (wealth) would lead to decreasing
housework burden on women, since the increased wealth level provides the family with the
possibility of hiring someone to do good part of that work. Yet, data extracted from the
sample and shown in table (7) points out that this saying is basically true for the high wealth
levels. To the contrary, the housework burden increases for the middle class women,
compared to both wealthiest and poorest categories of women.
110
Cathrine Hakim, How Can Social policy and Fiscal Policy Recognize Unpaid Family Work, p. 1-2
www.Ise.ac.uklnewsandMedia/news/archives/2010/08/CathrineHakimRenewal.pdf
111
For more details see chapter two of this study on international experience in calculating value of unpaid housework 112
To clarify the methodology with regards to dividing wealth categories please refer to chapter three of this study on
methodology of measuring and assessment of the value of women’s housework in Egypt
60
Table (7)
Average housework hours according to the standards of living (wealth)
Type of Work Standards of living
poor Poor -
below
average
Lower
strata
of
average
Averag
e level
Above
average -
high
Men Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or
sheep, activities for the purpose of household
consumption, including cutting grass, collecting
harvest, making butter, or cheese
1.97 1.47 1.13 0.63 0.20
Shopping for the home, including the purchase of
food, clothing and household supplies home or
transporting one family members to their activities
1.73 1.91 1.89 1.99 2.31
construction or maintenance activities at family home 0.26 0.22 0.24 0.15 0.14 Domestic activities including food preparation,
washing dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing,
cleaning the house
0.22 0.21 0.23 0.27 0.44
Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the
oven or any other purposes 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.01
Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 0.21 0.24 0.33 0.42 0.42 Caring for children and the elderly along with other
activities at the same time 0.12 0.27 0.28 0.40 0.42
total 4.58 4.39 4.14 3.88 3.94 Number of individuals 3000 3175 3096 2800 2777
women Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,
activities for the purpose of household consumption,
including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making
butter or cheese
1.92 1.59 1.35 0.89 0.33
Shopping for the home, including the purchase of
food, clothing and household supplies home or
transporting one family members too their activities
3.67 4.19 4.21 4.19 4.16
construction or maintenance activities at family home 0.20 0.14 0.26 0.21 0.16 Domestic activities including food preparation,
washing dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing,
cleaning the house
12.74 13.96 14.55 14.77 13.87
Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the
oven or any other purposes 0.62 0.36 0.29 0.17 0.07
Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 4.19 5.31 5.76 6.10 4.55 Caring for children and the elderly along with other
activities at the same time 4.89 5.45 5.75 5.60 4.72
total 28.23 31.00 32.17 31.93 27.86 Number of individuals ** 3053 3178 3105 2934 2947
The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from the ELMPS 2012 data.
61
.* Standards of living were prepared by matching the Quintet division by the wealth score used in the
ELMPS, and the CAPMAS decimal expenditure segments (in the income expenditure and consumption
research 2012/2013 page 39). See explanation of measuring and estimating value of housework
methodology in chapter 3 of this study.
As table (7) indicates, the average housework hours for the poor women segment is 28.23
hours per week, increases to 32 hours in the third and fourth segments representing the
intermediate standard of living, whereas it is limited to 27.6 hours for the above the middle
and high level .
With regards to the details of unpaid housework, it is noted that moving to a higher strata is
linked to continuous decrease in two specific types of housework: farming activities and
fetching water and fuel. This reflects to a great extent the changes associated with improved
standard of living, mainly living in areas with better housing and facilities, increased
purchasing power of agricultural and animal products from the market, and the ability to hire
someone to carry out such activities.
As for domestic activities and care for children, the elderly and the sick, table (7) show
increased average working hours of women at the wealth intermediate segments compared to
the poor segment, then its decrease in the above average-high segment. In our view, this result
reflects what is noted for the Egyptian middle class, where the mother takes responsibility for
housework activities and allows her children to dedicate their time for their studies, contrary to
the situation within limited income families, where girls, even during schooling, help in
housework leading to distribution of those activities on a wider number of family members.
This result may also reflect conclusions of some studies explaining differentiation between
men and women with regards to housework; that technological progress an availability of
electric devices helped decreasing physical effort in housework, but didn’t necessarily decrease
the time spent in these activities. These studies see that electrical home appliances availability
lead middle class women to do housework by themselves rather than of hiring others to do it.
The decreased physical effort encouraged middle class women to repeat frequently some
“strenuous” domestic chores. Such studies argue that the presence of electric washing machine
62
for example, reduced the washing process effort, but enhanced the repetition of this process to
enable the daily changing of family clothes, a matter that was limited to rich class113
In all instances, it is clear that middle class Egyptian women bear the greatest burden of
housework, and that such burden might not be tangibly reduced except at high levels of wealth.
Upon dividing the 5th
segment of wealth levels to separate the highest 10% segment of respondents,
it was noticed that the average work hours spent on housework activities was reduced 12.78
hours/week compared to almost 15 hours/week for middle class women.
Interestingly, Table (7) also shows an increased average housework hours in the area of care
for children, the elderly and the sick for middle class women (11-12 hours /week) compared to
women in both the poor and high segments (almost 9 hours/week for both). This might reflect what
Marxists feminists argue, that middle class women play a significant role in contributing to
children’s education, where the schooling system presumes that there is someone at home helping
children in studying, a task that mothers usually do.114
It might also reflect the deterioration of the
public education system in Egypt, and the increasing focus on the role of home and private lessons to
compensate for the regressing role of state.
Although it is hard to assess the exact influence of these factors on the results of our sample (since
the survey does not have separate questions on child care on the one hand and the care of the elderly
and sick on the other hand, or questions on educational support separate from the rest of care work),
yet, according to sample data, it is mainly mothers who bear the responsibility of helping children in
studying. Answers of children respondents in the survey (6 years and above) to the question on who
helps the child in studying, identified mothers in 61% of cases compared to fathers in 12% of
cases115
.
Finally, table (7) indicates that the huge gap between average housework hours for women and men
still exists at all wealth levels, with a slight increase at the intermediate segments reflecting the
increasing burden of work for women in these segments as explained before.
113
Loree A. Prineau, A Woman's Place: Unpaid Work in the Home, The American Journal of Occupational therapy,
November 1992, p. 983
114
See chapter one of this study, on housework in economic thought 115
Answers to question number 2173, individual questionnaire, chapter 2, section 2.1 ELMPS 2012
63
Second estimation to women’s total contribution in the economic activity
measured by total work hours:
Estimating women’s total contribution to economic activity in Egypt measured as total work
hours requires calculating total annual work hours for women and men in Egypt in age category
within the age of work (15-less than 65 years). We calculated these hours for the year ending in June
2012116
through applying results on average work hours per week for men and women of our sample
on total population in 2012.
The first step was calculating the number of population in the specific age group as shown in
table (8),with a total population 53.3 million, divided into 49% women and 51% men
116
The survey was conducted during the period March-June 2012
64
Table (8)
Number of Population in Egypt 2012
Age Category 15 – less than 65
Total women Men
29294037 14354717 14939320 Rural
23976279 11822864 12153415 Urban
53270316 26177581 27092735 Total
Source:
Calculated from CAPMAS data, annual book 2013, Population statistics, tables (2-5)
Deciding the number of female and male population in the labor force age group, the number
of total annual work hours for each of them was calculated as shown in table (9). It is clear from the
table that the women’s total work hours during the year ending in June 30th , 2012, reached 50.058
million work hours compared with 58.197 work hours for men. Thus, women’s contribution
represented 46.2% of the total work hours during the aforementioned financial year.
Table (9)
Total Working hours for women and men
Financial year ending June 2012
total women Men Type of work
47213 41294 5919 Unpaid housework
61042 8764 52278 Paid work for the market
108255 50058 58197 Total working hours
100 46.2 53.8 Proportional share
Calculated by the research based on
Average individual’s annual work hours for the = (average weekly work hours ÷ 7) x (365 days)
Annual work hours for men and women = average annual work hours x men and women
population in June 2012
65
Table (10) displays total work hours for men and women distributed by type of work. For
men, unpaid housework represents 10% of their total work hours compared to 90% work for the
market. For women, unpaid housework represents 82.5% compared 17.5% to work for the
market.(This stresses the repeated phenomenon in time use studies in different communities that the
major part of women’s work is unpaid.
Table (10)
Distribution of Total Working hours for women and men according to Type of work
Financial year ending June 2012
Women Men
Type of work
% Hours
(million)
%Hours
(million)
82.5 41294 10.2 5919 Unpaid housework
17.5 8764 89.8 52278 Paid work for the market
100 50058 100 58197 Total working hours
Calculated form data in the previous table
It is obvious from the above that if women represent 49% of the labor force age category, they
contribute at least 46.2% of the total working hours for this category,( taking into consideration
the aforementioned reservations regarding women’s average work hours in rural areas). This
refutes the saying on decreased women’s contribution to economic activities in Egypt.
66
Third: Estimating the monetary value of women’s unpaid housework and its
percentage to GDP alternative co
To estimate the monetary value of unpaid housework, we used both the alternative opportunity cost
and the generalist alternative cost ass explained earlier in chapter 3.
The results of using both methods was as follows:
1- Estimates using Alternative opportunity cost
National average of payment per hours for both women and men was used as an expression of
alternative opportunity cost. Accordingly, unpaid housework in Egypt for the financial year ending
June 30th
2012 was estimated to be 524.5 Billion LE, representing 34.8% of GDP, divided between
women 30.2% of GDP (455.0 Billion LE) and men 4.6% of GDP (69.5 Billion LE) as shown in table
(11)
Table (11)
Estimation of unpaid housework according to Alternative Opportunity cost
Financial year ending June 2012
Total Women Men
47213 41294 5919 No of Hours (million)
11.018 11.745 Average wage for hour at the national
level *
524495.95 454977.29 69518.66 Monetary value (million)
1508527.1
GDP in current prices (million)**
34.77 30.16 4.61 Percentage of unpaid housework of
GDP
* calculated using data on average work and monetary wages/week of workers in both public
and private sectors. CAPMAS. Annual Employment, wages and work hours Newsletter, 2012,
page 7.
** GDP in current prices cost of production factors. Ministry of Planning, Egyptian economy
total indicators. Annual series. www.mop.gov.eg
67
2- Estimates using generalist wage cost
In accordance with theoretical discourse and empirical experiences in using the generalist wage cost
method, we separated between all types of domestic care activities on the one hand, and the care for
children, the elderly and the sick activities on the other hand. We chose wage/hour for both women
and men in the accommodation and food sector as wage for domestic activities, and wage/hour for
both women and men in the health services and social work sector as the wage for care for children,
the elderly and the sick activities. (see methodological details in chapter 3).
Table (12)
Estimation of unpaid housework according to Generalist Alternative cost
and its % of GDP
Financial year ending June 2012
Total women Men
House care services
32059 27002 5057 No of Hours (million)
6.339 5.644 Wage/hour *
199808.53 171165.68 28642.85 Monetary value (million)
Care for children and elderly
15154 14292 862 No of Hours (million)
9.543 8.717 Wage/hour **
143902.61 136388.56 7514.05 Monetary value (million)
343711.14 307554.24 36156.90 Total Monetary value for housework (million)
1508527.1 GDP in current prices (million)
22.79 20.39 2.40 Percentage of unpaid housework to GDP
* average wage /hour for accommodation and food activities
** average wage/hour for health services and social work activities
Source:
Calculated using data on average work and monetary wages/week of workers in both public and
private sectors. CAPMAS. Annual Employment, wages and work hours Newsletter, 2012, page 7.
As table (12) shows, women’s working hours in domestic services and in providing care for children,
the elderly and the sick, were estimated at 171.2 and 136.4 Billion LE respectively, with a total
68
value for women’s housework as 307.6 Billion LE (20.4% of GDP) in the fiscal year ending June
30th
2012 .
Estimates of the monetary value of men’s housework were 28.6 Billion LE of domestic activities, 7.5
Billion LE for activities for care for the children, the elderly and the sick, with a total 36.1 Billion LE
(2.4% of GDP) in the fiscal year ending June 30th
2012.
Thus total estimates of total values of housework during the fiscal year ending June 30th
2012 was 343.7 Billion LE (22.8% of GDP distributed between women 20.4% and men 2.4% as
clear from table (12).
It is clear from the above, that estimates of unpaid housework value and its percentage to
the GDP differs according to the type of wages used in estimation. The monetary value of
housework using the Generalist Market Replacement Cost, is much lower than the value estimated
using the alternative opportunity cost, which is attributed to the low levels of wages in sectors
representing housework compared to the general average of wages at the national level. Following is
a briefing of concluded results:
1- Value estimates of housework ranged between 343.7 and 524.5 Billion LE, representing
respectively a percentage ranging between 22.8% and 34.7% of the total GDP in the
fiscal year ending June 30th
2012
2- Value estimates of women’s housework ranged between307.6 and 455 Billion LE,
representing respectively what ranges between 20.4% and 30.2% of the total GDP in the
fiscal year ending June 30th
2012. Using the simple median of these two values, we can
say that women’s housework contribute almost 25% of the total GDP.
69
Conclusions and Recommendations
What we learnt? What is Next
The System for National Accounts by which abide all countries of the world, still excludes unpaid
housework as it does not represent an economic activity for the market. However, the evolution of
economic thought and feminist movement during the twentieth century, particularly since the seventies,
lead gradually to recognizing the importance of housework and its impact on community welfare.
Eventually, the UN Statistics commission acknowledged the necessity of preparing Satellite Accounts
to the SNA to address unpaid housework statistics and the distribution of the working hours on
housework between women and men. The commission underscored the significance of satellite
accounts to reaching a realistic picture of the economic performance and social progress, which GDP
indicator fails to reflect it comprehensively.
Measuring and estimating the value of unpaid housework and results of studies in different countries of
the world clarified the great contribution of housework to community welfare, and that women carry the
major part of that work. Time use surveys showed that in many times women’s total work hours exceeds
those of men, and consequently, women get less hours for rest and leisure. All this helped the feminist
movement all over the world to demand the right to balance work and life responsibilities, and
redistribution of these responsibilities between women and men in the family, as well as supporting
demands for equal pay, taking into consideration that child cares specifically represents a kind of public
services and a human investment for the whole community and not just for the family.
Experiences of different countries reveal varying community responses, with regards to degree or extent,
to some women’s demands whether at the level of trials to redistribute child care responsibilities
between men and women in the family, or state involvement to carry out some of those responsibilities,
as well as providing a “ family friendly” work environment. Some improvement had been achieved with
regards to secure the principle of “equal pay for equal work”. There is also an increasing trend to
acknowledge women’s right to share the wealth established during marriage as it is the result of joint
work of which unpaid housework is an essential part.
Our trial, based on data from ELMPS 2012, to measure and assess the value of women’s unpaid
housework and its percentage to GDP lead to the following main results:
70
1- Egyptian Women represent 49% of the population in the labor force age category. They
contribute at least around 46.2% of the total paid/unpaid work hours within this category, a fact
which refutes the claim of low contribution of women in the economic activity.
2- Estimates of the housework value ranged between 307.6 to 455 Billion LE, which represents
respectively 20.4% - 30.2% of GDP in the fiscal year ending June 30th 2012. Using the simple
median of those two estimates, we can say that women’s housework contribution in Egypt
represents around 25% of GDP.
3- Results from the sample data underscore the huge gap between women and men in terms of the
number of hours they contribute to housework; where women’s average housework hours/week
is 30.25 hours compared to 4.19 hours/week for men.
4- Domestic services activities consume the greater part of women’s time provided in unpaid
housework; 47% of the total time spent on housework with an average of 14 hours/week
compared to men 0.27 hours/week.
5- Care for children, the elderly and the sick activities are considered as primarily women’s
responsibility, with an average 10.47 hours/week compared to only one hour/week for men.
6- The burden of construction or maintenance activities at family home is distributed almost
equally between women and men (0.19 and 0.20 hours/week respectively) despite the prevailing
assumption that these are usually men’s responsibility and opposite to what similar studies in
western societies underscore, i.e. it is mainly men who carry out such activities.
7- In rural areas, the average housework hours/week is 30.75 and 4.50 for women and men
respectively. The average of time spent on “Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the
oven or any other purposes” is double the time spent on these activities in urban areas. In our
view the permanence of such activities to begin with, in the Egyptian society reflects partly what
the official data reveals, that 9.2% of rural households and 4.7 of urban households still lack pure
water sources.
8- Marriage increases the burden of unpaid housework for both men and women. However, this
increase denotes a “qualitative leap” for married women whose average unpaid housework hours
/week is 37.27 hours compared to 13.80 for unmarried women. The gap between women and
men also increase with marriage to be seven folds between married couples, compared to five
folds between un married women and men.
9- Despite the common assumption on acceptance of Egyptian men to share housework activities,
the sample data, to the contrary, underscores that married men spend less time on such activities
compared to unmarried men indicating that marriage leads to shifting any burdens men used to
carry before marriage to women.
71
10- Increased number of family members leads to increased housework burden for women. The big
leap happens when the family members number is 3, where average housework hours/week
increases from 13 to around 40 hours/week. Assuming that the third member means having a
child, the study sample results emphasizes results of similar studies that the big increase of the
housework burden on women happens with the first child, then slight increases happen with the
following children.
11- The average women’s housework hours reaches its maximum (40.5 hours/week) when the
family size is 4, then it regresses to 37.43 when the family members are more than 5. This
regression is concentrated mainly in the “care for children, the elderly and the sick” and
“households activities”. This might reflect a generally accepted phenomenon in the Egyptian
society that older children provide support in caring for the younger members of the family, and
that younger members, particularly girls, carrying out some domestic activities instead of the
mother.
12- The gap between married women and men with regards to the total work burden narrows clearly
with the increase of family size. At the level of 4 members family, the average total work hours
for women is 48.23 hours; very near to the average total work hours for men 50.34 hours. The
convergence of total work burden is not attributed only to women’s huge housework burden
compared to men, but also to the tangible increase of average number of hours of women’s work
in the market, after the shock of first child. Such a result might reflect that seeking additional
income sources to keep up to the increasing family expenses, and consequently increased
working hours for the market, is not limited to men. Is seems that the increased number of
children leads women to work for the market to face the increased family expenses.
13- Working women in Egypt suffer from the double-shift work phenomenon, comprising two work
shifts, one in the market and another at home. Consequently, the total work hours for working
women is 68.68 hours/week compared to only 53.60 for men.
14- Although the total work burden for working women in Egypt exceeds that of men, the greater
part of working men work is paid work (91%), while the greater part of working women’s work
is unpaid housework (46%). Moreover, official data indicates that 48% of working women in
Egypt, work in the informal sector where the percentage of unpaid women is around 63% in rural
areas and 41% in urban areas.
15- Despite the common assumption that the higher standard of living (wealth) would lead to
decreasing housework burden on women as it provides the family with the possibility of hiring
someone to do good part of that work, yet, data from our sample points out that this saying is
72
basically true for the high wealth levels, but not for the middle class women whose housework
burden, to the contrary, increases compared to both wealthiest and poorest categories of women.
16- average housework hours in the area of care for children, the elderly and the sick increases in
case of middle class women (11-12 hours /week) compared to women in both the poor and high
segments (almost 9 hours/week for both. This might reflect what Marxists feminists say, that
middle class women play a significant role in contributing to children’s education, where the
schooling system presumes that there is someone at home helping children in studying, a task
that mothers usually do. It might also reflect the deterioration of the public education system in
Egypt, and the increasing focus on the role of home and private lessons to compensate for the
regressing role of state.
17- Although it is hard to assess the exact influence of these factors on the results of our sample,
since the survey does not have separate questions on child care on the one hand and the care of
the elderly and sick on the other hand, or questions on educational support separate from the rest
of care work, yet, according to sample data, it is mainly mothers who bear the responsibility of
helping children in studying. Answers of children respondents identified mothers in 61% of
cases compared to fathers in 12% of cases.
18- Study results expose the deception of “Egyptian women’s reluctance to work”, and their
preference to “stay at home after marriage to care for their families”. On the contrary, study
results indicate that male oppression through the institution of marriage is the main reason behind
women’s leaving their paid jobs. When women were asked about the main reasons for breaking
off their paid jobs, the first reason was disproof of fiancé /husband (44.8%), whereas child care
was only 15.5%.
19- “Family unfriendly” work environment, as well as the difficulty to find properly paid work, if
any, in the light of problems of economic stagnation and inappropriate conditions in the private
sectors and discrimination against women part of the reasons behind women ceasing to work.
17.7% of respondents reported that they stayed at home due to lack of proper work, proper wage
or even no work at all.
20- Women respondents’ answers emphasized their pursuit of reconciliation between work duties
and child care demands, even if this entails to stop work for some time with readiness to return
whenever they have a chance. In 60% of cases, respondents were willing to go back to work,
although this, sometimes, was linked to the need to work, circumstances or type of available
work. This result matches with what the study results revealed of increasing market working
hours after the “shock of first child”, and with increasing family members as mentioned before.
73
Study results emphasize that paid work, despite its great significance, is not by itself an enough
condition for emancipation of women and enhancing their status and capabilities to share in decision
making. Talking about emancipation would be nonsense if the paid work means double work shifts, one
outside the home and the other inside it, or if such paid work is occurring in the absence of any legal
protection, social insurance or unionist rights. Response of women respondents stressed that more than
47% work without social or health insurance, and 17.5% had no contracts, and that 75% of those who
have contracts, the contracts are for one year or less. Moreover, more than 70% of respondents do not
have membership in any professional or labor trade unions.
74
What’s Next:
Estimating the monetary value of housework and the total actual contribution of Egyptian women in
economic activity compared to men’s contribution, represents, despite its significance just one step to
establish objective basis for enhancing women’s social status and their right to decision making and to
balancing life responsibilities/work. In our view the road map in this respect includes a number of
urgent tasks at the level of national statistics and feminist movement. Most important of these:
1- Official Statistical Institutions should acknowledge the significance of unpaid housework, and
commit itself to integrating gender statistics in data on time spent on housework, as well as
preparation of periodic comprehensive estimates of housework activities and including it in
Satellite Accounts to the System of National Accounts, as provided by the United Nations.
2- Time use surveys, prepared periodically within the Egyptian Labor Market Panel Survey
(ELMPS) in cooperation between the Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics
(CAPMAS) and the Economic Research Forum (ERF), should be developed to include more
details relevant to types of housework, particularly with regards to distribution of care activities
between child care on the one hand and care for the elderly and the sick on the other hand, as
well as clarifying the percentage of support activities of the total child care activities.
3- Time use surveys should be developed to guarantee precise knowledge of all forms of rural
women’s work for the market, particularly in the informal sector, for the family and in exchanged
mutual support within what is known as the companionship (Muzamalah) mechanism.
4- Time use surveys should be developed to expand the concept of unpaid housework to include
also voluntary work, a matter that will provide more precise picture of such work and its
contribution to the society’s welfare, and provide a bigger possibility to compare with similar
international data.
5- The women’s movement within the context of civil society organizations and political parties
should embark on the following
a. Community awareness of the role of unpaid housework with regards to community welfare
and the real women’s contribution in the economic activity
b. Lobby to issue needed legislative reforms to labor law
i. to guarantee “family friendly” work environment with regards to maternity and child
care leaves, and possibilities for part-time work (for both men and women)
ii. to include domestic servants and agricultural workers, as a necessary step to secure
legal and insurance protection for women working in these two fields
75
c. reform the current legal text concerning nurseries in the work facilities to include men too, so
that establishing nurseries require a minimum number of women and/or men working in the
facility.
d. Lobby to enforce the existing legal texts on establishing nurseries in facilities where a
minimum number of women work Raise working women’s awareness on the significance of
establishing and joining professional and labor trade unions to defend their rights and provide
them with the needed information and training
e. Enact constitutional texts with regards to nondiscrimination, and issuing of legislations to
prohibit and criminalize discrimination and establish necessary monitoring mechanisms
f. he Lobby to enforce implementation of minimum wages in the private sector
g. Resist any changes in the health insurance law that might lead to reduce women’s
reproductive health care or raise it cost
h. Change traditional images on women’s and men’s relation with housework and child care in
school books, drama and commercial advertisement
i. Demand that education planning should include expansion in nurseries and kinder gardens for
preschool age as well as expansion of school activities to cover weekends, official holidays
and summer holiday.
j. Improve pension of women heading households to go beyond the concept of social support to
the concept of the right to insurance protection, which the state should provide in return for
women’s contribution in the provision of establishing human capital and regeneration of the
labor power for the whole community.
k. Demand legislations with regards to sharing of matrimonial wealth between spouses, taking
into account experiences of some Islamic countries like Malaysia and some Arab countries
like Tunisia and Morocco
.
76
References
Arabic References
1- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS) and Economic Research Forum
(ERF), Panel Survey to study characteristics of labor market in the Arab Republic of Egypt, 2012.
Individual Questionnaire.
2- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Annual Statistics’ Book for Arab Republic
of Egypt. 2013
3- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Annual newsletter: Employment, wages and
work hours. 2013
4- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Annual newsletter: Employment, wages and
work hours. 2012
5- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, study on Income, Expenditure and
Consumption 2012/2013
6- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Results of study labor force 2012
7- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, the Woman and Man in Egypt. 2011
8- Ministry of Planning, Egyptian economy total indicators. Annual series. Ministry of Planning, Egyptian
economy total indicators. Annual series. www.mop.gov.eg
9- Ministry of Planning, System of National Accounts. Arabic version 2008 . www.mop.gov.eg
10- Magalat Al Ahwal al Shkhsyea Law number 94/1998. Dated 5 November 1998. On the Shared estates
between spouses in Tunisia.
11- Mudawanet Al Usrah, Law 70-3/2004. Morocco. www.ugtm.ma/siteugtm/pdf/codefamille_ar.pdf
77
English References
1- A. C. Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Macmillan and Co. Limited, London, 1932 [1978].
2- Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom, New York, Anchor Books, 1999.
3- Ann Chadeau, What is Households' Non-Market Production Worth? OECD Economic Studies No. 18,
Spring 1992.
4- August Bebel, Woman under Socialism, 1879, translated by Daniel de Leon, New York, Labor News
Company, 1961.
5- Cathrine Hakim, How Can Social policy and Fiscal Policy Recognize Unpaid Family Work.
www.Ise.ac.uklnewsandMedia/news/archives/2010/08/CathrineHakimRenewal.pdf
6- Cathrine Hakim, Women, Careers and work – life preferences, British Journal of Guidance and Counseling,
August 2006.
7- Christine Delphy, Close to Home: A Materialist Analysis of Women's Oppression, University of
Massachusetts, 1984.
8- Christine M. Koogel, Globalization and Women's Paid work: Expanding Freedom? Feminist Economics, 9,
2003. www.tandf.co.uk/journals
9- Collin Clark, "The Economics of Housework", Bulletin of the Oxford University Institute of Statistics,
1958.
10- EJCL, Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, Matrimonial Property in Europe – A Link between
Sociology and Family Law, Vol. 12, December 2008. www.ejcl.org
11- Elizabeth Blackwell, Cited in William Leach, True Love and Perfect Union, New York, 1980.
12- ERF, Egypt labor force panel survey 2012, micro data.
13- Family Justice Service, Matrimonial Property – General Information, Alberta, Canada.
www.albertacourts.ab.ca/fjs/selfhelp/FJS_Property_married_12.pdf
14- Freiedraich Engels, The Origin of the Family Private Property and the State, 1884, Moscow, Progress
Publishes, 1972.
15- Gianna C. Giannelli et al., GDP and the Value of Caretaking: How Much does Europe Care? IZA,
Discussion Paper No. 5046, July 2010.
16- Gray S. Becker, A Theory of the Allocation of Time, Economic Journal, 1965.
17- ILO, Global Employment Trends for Women 2012.
18- Johnna Varjonen et al., Satellite Accounts on Household Production: Eurostat Methodology and
Experiences to apply it, Statistics Finland, Working Papers 1/2014.
19- Loree A. Primeau, A Woman's Place: Unpaid work in the Home, The American Journal of Occupational
Therapy, November 1992.
20 - Marilyn Waring, If Women Counted: New Feminist Economics, Harper Collins Publishers, Paper pack
Edition, 1990.
21- Nancy Folbre, The Unproductive Housewife: Her Evolution in Nineteenth Century Economic Thought,
Journal of women in Culture and society, the University of Chicago, 1991.
22- Norliah Ibrahim et al., The Wrights of the Wife to Claim on a Division of Matrimonial Property after
Dissolution of Marriage: Malaysian perspective, Faculty of Law, International Islamic University of Malaysia.
www.childjustice.org/index.php/component/edocoman/?task=document.viewdoc&id=226&Itemid=468
78
23- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social
Affairs, "Key Characteristics of Parental Leave Systems, May 2014
24- OECD Family Database, "Time use for work, care, and other day-to-day activities", OECD – Social
Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social affairs. www.oecd.org/social/family/database
25- OECD, Cooking, "Caring and Volunteering: Unpaid Work Around The World", OECD Social,
Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 116, 2010.
26- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social
Affairs, Typology of Children and Early Education Services, December 2010.
27- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social
Affairs, Out – of – school – hours Care Services.
28- Oscar Lange, Political Economy, Volume I: General Problems, New York, Macmillan, 1963.
29- Rachel Krantz – Kent, Measuring Time Spent in Unpaid Household Work: Results from the American
Time Use Survey, Monthly Labor Review, July 2009.
30- Ragui Assaad and Caroline Kraft, The Egypt Market Panel Survey: Introducing the 2012 Round, ERF,
Working Paper 758, June 2013.
31- Rana Hendy, Rethinking Time Allocation of Egyptian Women: A Matching Analysis, Economic Research
Forum, Working Paper No. 256, 2010.
32- Report by the commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress,
www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr
33- Rosa Luxemburg, "Women's Suffrage and Class Struggle" in Dick Howard, Selected Political Writings of
Rosa Luxemburg, 1912, New York, Monthly Review Press, 1971.
34- Simon Kuznets, National Income and its Composition, New York, National Bureau of Economic
Research, 1941.
35- Statistics Sweden, Women and Men in Sweden - Facts and Figures 2010.
36- Summary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Minnesota advocates for Human Rights,
January 1996.
37- Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory about Everything: Domestic Labor in
Neoclassical & Marxian Economics, Women's Economic Policy Analysis Unit, Curtin University of
Technology, August 2001.
38- United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, Seminar on measuring
the contribution of women and men to the economy, New York, 28 February 2013.
39 - UN Commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, "Equal sharing of
responsibilities between men and women, including care giving in the context HIV/AIDS", 12 March 2013.
40- UNRISD, United Nations Institute for Social Development, "Gender Pattern and Value of Unpaid Work"
– findings for China's first large scale Time Use Survey, October 2012.
41- Wally Seccombe, Reflections on the Domestic Labor Debate and Prospects for Marxist-Feminist
Synthesis, 1986.
42- Wally Seccombe, The Housewife and Her Labor under Capitalism, New Left Review, 1974, No. 83.
43- World Bank, Valuing Women's Work, World Human Development Report 1992.