CC BY
17
2017
Perm University Herald
ECONOMY
Vol. 12. No. 3
doi 10.17072/1994-9960-2017-3-375-387 UDK 65:[316.354:351/354] LBK 33+60.561.1 JEL Code J160, 0150
GENDER POWER INSTITUTE CONCEPT AS A TREND TO DEVELOP METHODS OF GENDER ECONOMICS: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND OF THE ISSUE
Elena V. Bazueva
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-0945-3597, Researcher ID: E-1233-2017
E-mail: bazueva.l@mail .ru
Perm State University
15, Bukireva st., Perm, 614990, Russia
The concept, that analyses economic nature of power relationship between men and women, has been developed on the basis of synthesis of institutional economic theory tools, feminist economics and hierarchical analysis. These power relationships determine the status of men and women in a family and society economy as well as the choice of possible models of behavior. The fundamental issues of the author's concept are: 1) internal determinacy of dependence of an economic agent-object on an agent-subject; 2) unequal evaluation of resources of a subject and an object of gender power and gender asymmetrical distribution of economic resources; 3) institutional restrictions of hierarchy of gender power distribution are the factor of its reproduction at each level of an economic system; 4) opportunities to realize human capital of men and women are restricted within the limits of institutional roles given by the system of gender power institutes; 5) internal non-coordination of the advanced power disposition reduces the quality of functioning of the whole hierarchical system of gender power institutes and is projected to the level of its interaction with social-economic system in general. The categorical apparatus of feminist economics has been specified and the author has suggested the interpretation of the following categories: gender power, an institute of gender power, institutional role of a subject of gender interaction. The opportunity to apply the postulates of the author's concept in practice has been demonstrated in the case study of the analysis of the current system of gender power institutes in Russia. The main characteristics of inefficiency of the present system of institutes have been structured. Among them are formal washing out of power borders in macrolevel institutes and strengthening of gender power concentration in microlevel institutes, uniformity of power disposition for subjects, who are at the same hierarchy level, the aims and functions of institutes of different hierarchy level are not coherent, population is not informed enough about forms and facts of gender power manifestation, there are no inverse and horizontal relations among the system elements. The stages to define the strategic imperatives of gender power institutes system of elitist type in modern Russia have been indicated. They are 1) to study peculiarities of possible strategies of institute changes; 2) to specify determinants of quality of gender power institute system; 3) to reveal the nature and to substantiate the importance to change the current system of gender power institutes from the view point of economic agents (men and women); 4) to determine the functioning trajectory and scenario of gender power institutes of elitist type.
Keywords: gender power, gender power institute, concept, methodology, gender economy, hierarchical analysis, efficiency, agents, order, structure.
© Bazueva E.V., 2017
КОНЦЕПЦИЯ ИНСТИТУТОВ ГЕНДЕРНОЙ ВЛАСТИ КАК НАПРАВЛЕНИЕ РАЗВИТИЯ МЕТОДОВ ГЕНДЕРНОЙ ЭКОНОМИКИ: ТЕОРЕТИЧЕСКАЯ ПОСТАНОВКА ВОПРОСА
Елена Валерьевна Базуева
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-0945-3597, Researcher ID: E-1233-2017 Электронный адрес: [email protected]
Пермский государственный национальный исследовательский университет 614990, Россия, г. Пермь, ул. Букирева, 15
На основе синтеза инструментария институциональной экономической теории, тендерной экономики и иерархического анализа разработана концепция, позволяющая анализировать экономическую природу властных отношений между мужчинами и женщинами, выступающих основой определения их статуса в экономике семьи и общества, а так же выбора целей и возможных вариантов поведения. Представлены базовые положения авторской концепции: 1) внутренняя детерминированность возникновения зависимости экономического агента-объекта от агента-субъекта; 2) неравнозначная оценка ресурсов объекта и субъекта тендерной власти и гендерно асимметричное распределение экономических ресурсов; 3) институциональные ограничения иерархии распределения гендерной власти выступают фактором ее воспроизводства на каждом уровне экономической системы; 4) возможности реализации человеческого капитала мужчин и женщин ограничены в пределах институциональных ролей, заданных системой институтов гендерной власти; 5) внутренняя несогласованность выдвигаемой диспозиции власти снижает качество функционирования всей иерархической системы институтов гендерной власти и проецируется на уровень ее взаимодействия с социально-экономической системой в целом. Уточнен категориальный аппарат гендерной экономики и предложено авторское толкование следующих категорий: гендерная власть, институт гендерной власти, институциональная роль субъекта гендерного взаимодействия. Возможность практического применения постулатов авторской концепции показана на примере анализа действующей в современной России системы институтов гендерной власти. Структурированы основные параметры неэффективности данной системы институтов: формальное размывание границ власти в институтах макроуровня и усиление концентрации гендерной власти в институтах микроуровня, унифицированность диспозиции власти для субъектов, находящихся на одном уровне иерархии, некогерентность целей и функций институтов разных уровней иерархии, низкая степень информированности населения о формах и фактах проявления гендерной власти, отсутствие обратных и горизонтальных связей между элементами системы. Обозначены этапы при определении стратегических императивов развития системы институтов гендерной власти эгалитарного типа в современной России: 1) изучение особенностей возможных стратегий институциональных изменений; 2) уточнение детерминантов качества системы институтов гендерной власти; 3) выявление природы и обоснование необходимости изменения действующей системы институтов гендерной власти со стороны экономических агентов (мужчин и женщин); 4) определение траектории и сценария функционирования системы институтов гендерной власти эгалитарного типа.
Ключевые слова: гендерная власть, институт гендерной власти, концепция, методология, гендерная экономика, иерархический анализ, эффективность, агенты, порядок, структура.
Introduction
Currently the supporters of the feminist economics, who apply the tools of conventional economics, study a wide range of gender inequality issues. At the same time the Marxist and neoclassical branches of economics are considered to be the most developed. According to Irene van Staveren it is the result of the first stage of the development of the feminist economics. The aim of the first stage was to "to criticize the main branch of economics
(neoclassical economics) and its neoliberal political consequences" [1].
Recently this branch of scientific knowledge has applied the tools of different branches of institutional economics that has revealed that gender patterns of behaviour may be considered as an institute [2; 3]. These patterns are approved to act indirectly by means of other institutes (state, labour market, property rights, public services, education, social environment, family) providing
"institutionalized advantages and disadvantages" depending on a gender [2; 4] and to reproduce
gender inequality in different spheres of society [2; 4; 5; 6; 7]. However in different studies scientists usually pay attention to the influence of particular institutes on gender inequality. At the same time, Mona Lena Krook and Fiona Mackay have pointed out that institutional theory tools are used to study only formal institutes [7]. Currently the most common objects of study are 1) the election system that limits the representativeness of women in politics [7; 8]; 2) labour market institutes as the main field of gender inequality reproduction [2; 9]; 3) different gender regimes of welfare states [10; 11]. The above distinguished institutes are analyzed first of all as atomic units despite the patters of their interaction [4; 12]. Moreover, the institutes providing the internal determination of economic agent behaviour are excluded from this institutional system. This determination, as it will be demonstrated further, explains the origin of power. Among Russian scientists who apply the synthesis of institutional economic theory and gender economy, we should mention M. B. Budaeva [13]. Her works are devoted to the specificity of gender power manifestation in the condition of planned and market economy. But the disadvantages of these studies are the lack of methodology for institutional economic theory.
Methodology (research tools)
To remove the above mentioned restrictions, the study of the feminist economics as an object of institutional analysis should be specified in two aspects.
The first aspect is to specify the categorical apparatus (an object) of the study using the tools of one of the branches of institutional theory - power economics. The relevance to apply the power economics tools is determined, on the one hand, by the peculiarities of the development of the feminist economics as a branch of science and, on the other hand, by the need to clarify the coordinate system of scientific thinking because the hermeneutics ambiguity of the categorical apparatus is still typical for scientists working in this field.
The category of power is known to have always been important in feminist studies as power is the main tool of gender relationships structuring where a man is a subject of power
and a woman is an object. Systematization of feminist studies, that became a basis to form the methodology of feminist economics has concluded that power was considered as an external impact without any internal forms of demonstration. In its turn, the external features and forms of demonstration need to be explained and are rather the starting point of the study than the basis for the theoretical concept of power relations research. The questions that need to be explained are: how can one agent influence the behaviour of another agent? Why can a power subject subordinate counteragent's behaviour to achieve goals? How can the object's resistance be overcome?
To answer these questions the behaviour model of the power theory developed by Vyacheslav Dement'ev will be used. He is reminded to have added costs connected with power elements in transactions between them in the neo-institutional model of economic agent behaviour. These costs were added to transformation and trans-sanction costs in the neo-institutional model of economic agent behaviour. And they include the subordinate costs and refusal costs. The first ones refer to costs by a managed agent when their recourses are subordinated in favour of a subject of power as a result the utilities for another agent are created. The refusal costs are created as additional for an object of power. An object will have to bare the costs when refuses to subordinate their recourses or when a managed agent uses own resources to the detriment of a managing agent. As a consequence, the content and the results of economic agent behaviour change. These can be expressed as 1) the change of costs and benefits of alternative models of economic behaviour; 2) the change of motivation of an economic agent to alternative models of behaviour because some models of economic behaviour become more "profitable" for an object or subject of power and others stop being profitable from the point of view of maximization of utility function; 3) the change in the resources distribution between parties of power relations i.e. resources controlled by an object of power pass under the control of a subject of power, in its turn an object of power may access to the resources of a subject of power; 4) the change of aims that the activity of
economic agents is aimed at; 5) the imbalanced production of goods, overproduction of some and underproduction of others [14, p. 74-88]. As a result a subject of power receives in exchange of their resources more than they "cost" in the absence of power effects, i.e. less than marginal costs on their creation (power rent). In its turn, an object of power receives less than their resources "cost" under the terms of perfect competition. i.e. less than the cost (price) of a marginal product created by these resources.
The second aspect suggests the transition from the presentation of the system of institutes that provides permanent reproduction of gender inequality as a part of external area to the presentation of the system as an aggregate of internal elements and their connections by the methods of interlevel approach based on the system analysis. This analysis is characterised by the addition of horizontal and vertical, feed forward and feedback, direct and indirect connections between the system elements and their study. The changes that occur in the system as a whole are the consequences of aggregate and slight changes of its individual parts, though it is impossible to trace the impact of any particular part. We would like to stress that the use of the interlevel approach suggests the transformation of the simplest management schemes in a hierarchic economy because the problem of the balanced development of all levels of hierarchy arises [15, p. 27-33].
The use of methodology of the interlevel approach accomplishes structuring of the investigated system of institutes. To our mind, this analytical operation is necessary to give a precise idea of the functioning active system of institutes and on this basis to determine possible strategic imperatives of its development. In this case we want to revise that the structuring of any system "refers us to a mixed spatial-functional task of a system because elements are often specified by spatial system forming features and connections - by functional ones (or vice versa). In their turn, spatial features identify objects using their location in space and time and functional space is formed by means of objects and phenomena. Under the function of the object we mean a systematically realized
method of its interaction with other objects of the system forming space or environment in this space [16, p. 26, 30].
Results
The application of the postulates of the behaviour theory of power by Vyacheslav Dement'ev towards the study of nature and mechanism of power relation between men and women specifies, to our mind, one of the key categories of the feminist economics - the category of power. From this point of view it is necessary to introduce the category of "gender power", it means a potential opportunity of a subject of power to affect the behaviour of an object of power by a specific mechanism of influence that is one of the gender power attributes, the mechanism of sanctions in order to maximize the own function of utility (appropriation of power rent) under the condition of asymmetry of economic resources distribution.
The essential characteristic of possible types and forms of gender power is presented in Table 1. We would like to stress that, first, the indicated forms of power complement each other, are, to some extent, the complements and according to historical or economic conditions each form has its own comparative advantages.
Secondly, despite the form and type (explicit and implicit) of refusal costs, they are all aimed to limit freedom and dependence of an economic agent, who is an object of power, from its subject. Thus, both types of gender power are, on the one hand, exact antithesis of freedom as a factor restricting the independence of the choice of an object of power.
Thirdly, externalities of power are bipolar: a subject of power has their positive external effect but an object of power has their negative ones, that is expressed in sanction to them in case of refusal to subordinate. Hence, when choosing models of behaviour an object of gender power should consider and compare the costs associated with subordination of own resources to the interests of an external economic agent (i.e. a subject) and alternative costs arising in case of "insubordination" [for more details see: 17].
Table 1
Essential characteristic of types and forms of gender power
Types of gender power Nature of gender power Forms of restraint of freedom in choosing Priority forms of power manifestation Sanctions for an object of power (refusal costs) when power dispositions are broken Externalities of gender power for its subject
Power based on violence Forced redistribution of resources External- physical violence Control over resources use Resources (goods) alienation. Loss of a part of income or property in the result of requisitioning by a subject of power Intentional in a form of receiving direct power rent -the difference between the costs of a subject of power to the violence use against its object and the "price" of its consequences for an object of power and the amount of subordination costs that this object is ready to pay to avoid violence
Internal- psychological compulsion Control of behaviour (of making decisions) Execution of actions or compliance of behaviour norms by an object of power when these actions or norms are of interest of its subject. Suppress of motivation for actions, that are alternative to subordination to a subject of power Unintentional getting additional benefits (dominant) effect in a form of modification of the activity results of an object of power
Power based on exchange External-voluntary exchange of resources External- address instructions Control of economic processes when resources are particularly used by economic agents Restrict the access to goods. Use of own resources to make benefits that are of interest of a subject of power Intentional in a form of power rent acquisition, opportunities to exceed the limits of own resources, of transformation of the composition and structure of real aims that a subject is aimed at maximizing the own advantages
Internal-presence of costs Control of interests and motivation Modification of choice conditions (the costs value of alternative behaviour models) Unintentional getting additional benefits (dominant) effect in a form of modification of the aims structure and motivation of an object of power
Genesis of reasons, that determine permanent reproduction of gender power at stages of civilization development, has revealed that social division of labour and unequal society assessment of the work results of men and women, that strengthened in the process of civilization development, were objective prerequisites for the formation of gender power.
On this basis the gender asymmetrical distribution of labour products and economic resources in whole was possible. This distribution is the main reason of power relations between economic agents. Permanent reproduction of these foundations to set gender power became possible in the result of appropriate gender roles consolidation in
"collective actions" through the rules system that regulate the relations between economic system agents. Analysis of different approaches to the definition of institutional environment content has revealed that the institutional environment creates the opportunity to implement one or the other type of activity in the framework specified by the particular system of restriction rules. These rules were formed under the impact of objective conditions of material production. In its turn, the institutional environment may also determine and specify a trend of development of material conditions of social life. This idea was stressed by the author of the "concept of orders" by Walter Eucken [18]. The distinguished feature of different economic orders is the correlation between power and freedom, i.e. economic reality is determined, first of all, by the extension how
Economic order
each individual is free to implement own economic plans. The category of "order" is also worked out by modern scientists in the frameworks of the feminist researches [19]. It includes the aggregation of different gender regimes (way of life) that are created by people's actions and strategies implemented in the frameworks of specified institutional conditions that form a range of objective obstacles and opportunities to implement actions and vital projects by particular men and women.
To our mind, the correlation between economic and gender orders and institutional environment where a subject and an object of gender power will play adequate economic roles specified in the economic scheme, may be expressed in the following scheme (Fig.) [for more details see: 20].
Gender order
Institutional environment of gender power
Interconnection between economic and gender order and institutional environment
Notes: direct relations of influence are marked by an unbroken line, inverse - by a dotted one; done by the author.
The analysis of the adequacy of economic and gender order changes, that we have conducted, has revealed that in fact the gender power concentration level and amount of subjects that regulate it change against the economic order type. Therefore, on the one hand the institutional environment determines what features of economic and gender orders may be realized at this particular time period since it creates the possibility to realize one or the other activity type in the restriction frameworks specified by a particular rules system. On the other hand, an institutional environment can not be formed "in isolation from" economic conditions and social structure since this imbalance will lead to an institutional conflict in the present institute system, and as a result, to the decrease of efficiency of social-economic system operation in whole1.
1 These conclusions were used by the author to develop quality criteria for the system of gender power insitutes.
Moreover, we have revealed that gender power exists in all types of economic and gender orders, even in competitive one, where a market is a subject of power. According to Vyacheslav Dement'ev "this type of power is characterized as ....quasi-power because in this case, unlike the direct power, some power features are absent. There is no economic agent (a subject of power), that is aimed at maximization of their utility and for this purpose overrides another economic agent (an object of power). But for all that, some essential features of power remain: submission is the result of a counteragent attempts to maximize their utility; there are (refusal) costs when an economic agent refuses to submit and also there are subordination costs that they have to incur in favour of external third parties" [14, p. 155-156]. As we can see the gender power phenomenon does not disappear. Never the less, elitist gender power is the most efficient type of its organization, it suggests the restriction of gender power by other economic agent' freedom, and so
its concentration level is not significant. This type of power is characterized by: 1) equal access of both men and women to manufacturing and income resources, including the state management; 2) the extension of public benefits related to child care to both parents; 3) the elimination of gender stereotypes effects in society and family economy; 4) similar returns to human capital from both men and women; 5) gender expertise of normative-legal programtarget documents and decision management.
Currently, contrary to the statements of the Government of the Russian Federation, we observe the removal from competitive economic order corresponding to market economy postulates, towards the development of "barter economy" order that is characterized by a maximum level of economic and gender power concentration. Not by chance, international experts state the increase of gap between declared, desired and implemented freedom, including gender one, in Russia2. This conclusion is supported by Freedom House researches "About the state of freedom in the world". According to these studies Russia has passed from the group of "partly free" to the group of "restricted" according to the level of political and civil liberties of citizens since 20043. The UN experts also noted the strengthening of gender power in modern economy of Russia4.
2 Mirovoi obzor o roli zhenshchin v razvitii v 2009 g. [World Survey of the Role of Women in Development. 2009] Doklad General'nogo sekretarya OON «Kontrol' zhenshchin nad ekonomicheskimi resursami i dostup k finansovym resurrsam, v t.ch. po linii mikrofinansirovaniya» [Report of the Expert Consultation: "Women's Control of Economic Resources and Access to Financial Resources, Including Mcrofinance"]. Available at: www.un.org/wom enwatch/daw/public/World Survey 2009.pdf (accessed 12.01.2011). (In Russian).
3 Freedom in the World. 2011. Available at: http://www.fre edomhouse.org/images/File/fiw/FIW%202011%20Booklet _1_11_11.pdf (accessed 12.03.2012).
4 Zaklyuchitel'nye zamechaniya Komiteta po likvidatsii diskriminatsii v otnoshenii zhenshchin: Rossiiskaya Federatsiya [Final Remarks of Committee on the Women's Discrimination Elimination: the Russian Federation]. Available at: htpp://www.gender.ru/resourcers/publications/ commen/2011/101112.pdf (accessed 30.11.2010). (In Russian).
The distinguished trends are also the results of power distribution between several subjects of power: family (in its head), social surroundings, organizations and the state. Within the given institutional environment restrictions and opportunities, each of them can form their own disposition of gender power that regulates interaction between an object of power and each of its subject. Therefore, each of them makes their own system of "rules of a game" with enforcement mechanisms to implement them (sanctions). Thus, each subject of power is an institute that is included in the whole system of gender power institutes.
Based on the analysis of essential features of an institute that are used by modern economic science and the study of the genesis of the system of factors of the reproduction of gender power, in our opinion, the gender power institute can be defined as a special kind of socio-economic institute that has been formed under the influence of objective conditions of material production (social division of labour) in the form of relatively stable power relations, secured through the system of legislative acts, contracts and informal rules, that organize forms of interaction of a subject and an object of power and define the objectives and model scenarios of their life.
In the suggested definition we distinguish the following key issues that give structural and functional characteristic of its content [for more details see: 21].
First - the content of a gender power institute is gradually changing as a result of changing of material conditions of production, that ensures its sustainability over a long period of time and the possibility to adapt to the system of rules and regulations of economic subjects incoming in this type of interaction, enhancing their expertise and allowing more rational behaviour adequately to the disposition of gender power (information function).
Second - the rules regulating power relations must be admitted by all interactive agents and must be implemented. (function of agreement and interests coordination). Only in this condition it is possible "to forecast the counteragents actions and so coordinate and submit the beforehand in accordance with the stereotypes of economic behaviour adopted
within the frameworks of a particular institute" [22, p. 51].
Third - the regulating of interaction forms between a subject and an object of power is implemented on the basis of the subordination of their behaviour adequately to the degree and size of power potentials (subordination function). Moreover, the resources, benefits and costs will be distributed adequately to power potentials. Thus, the gender power institute implements the distribution function.
Fourth - the system of preferences and the needs of institutional subjects, as well as incentives to economic activity are formed in the institutional environment and rely on social experience (accumulation function). And it is quite known that when accumulating experience to follow a given model of behaviour, costs are reduced when using this particular rule. However the transition to other activities or decision-making process becomes unprofitable and difficult. These activities and process may be more effective in comparison to traditional. In the result of this blocking effect the inefficient forms of gender-based interaction regulated by adequate institutional environment may exist for quite a long time. At that, they currently seem to be non-alternative and natural for economic subjects, though we have revealed in many of the existing formal and informal norms are the result of a long revolution.
The above-mentioned essential features and functions are typical for each institute in the system of gender power institutes as they support its unity and integrity.
The spatial-functional description of the system of gender power institutes operating in the conditions of modern Russia are shown in table 2. To describe the system in space the classification by the levels of economy developed by Georgi Kleiner has been used. According to the classification we may distinguish 1) the level of macro-economics determining macroeconomic processes; 2) the level of meso-economics that defines the operation and interaction of the enterprises and their groups, financial and industrial entities, complexes, industries and markets; 3) the level of microeconomics that refers to the decision-makings and activities of organizations and microagents in the face of the social
environment of nanoagents; 4) the level of nanoeconomics that determine social-economic behaviour of individual agents-individuals [23, p. 6]. The institutes that establish the authority of a state are on the first level, the institutes reflecting the characteristics of the institutional environment of regions in the formation of gender power disposition are on the second level, the institutes reproducing the power of organizations, social surroundings and family in the person of its head are on the third level, the institutes of internal power are on the fourth level. The latter is expressed by the impact on social needs, values and internal rules of behaviour of men and women creating the internal need to act according to the gender power disposition [for further information see: 24; 25]. It should be noted that the system of gender power institutes described in the above-mentioned spatial-functional classification is presented as a closed system, i.e. the analysis of the impact of international law regulating the human rights for the international legislation (the system of formal institutes) is excluded.
The features, that give a precise characteristic of each element (institute) of the system and determine the function of each element in the whole system, have been used to give a functional description of the system of gender power institutes. To our mined these features could be the following things: a subject and an object of power; power aims and functions that that it implements in the society; resources the power is based on; the content of power disposition (decision-making sphere, the field of activity or relationships that reinforce appropriate institutional roles5; the character of the imposed sanctions and the mechanism of control when the power disposition is broken; the power boarders of a given subject over a given object.
5 Under the institutional role of a subject of gender interaction we mean a finite set of template functions for men and women that determines their status in society and family economy and the choice of possible patterns of behavior, adequate to the existing institutional restrictions of the hierarchy of power distribution in the economic system.
Table 2
The institutional structure of gender power in modern Russia
Institutes (subjects) Object of power Aims of power Functions of power Disposition of gender power Control mechanisms
Content Institutional role
Macroeconomic and mesoeconomic institutes
State and regional power All economic agents of national economy Establishment of fundamental rules of economic behavior Enforcement of economic and civil rights Is the reason for the power of private economic agents, based on ownership or on the power rights, conferred by the state Fixation of formal gender equality Priority-driven state financing of "male" branches of economy Fixation of status for women as workers with family obligations and the main receivers of social services Limit of access to resources and goods For men - worker- professional For women - working mother System of public and regional bodies and institutes
M iicroeconomic institutes
Power of organization Employees Other organizations interacting with it Direct influence on behavior of other economic and state agents Maximization of profits as a result of cheap and more skilled women's labor use Loss of corporate saving as a result of attachment by the power subject (gender gap in payment) Dependence of vacancies from the presence of family obligations. With the aim of career development women can undergo sexual harassment from the male leaders, gap in salary, access restrictions to the system of raising the level of professional skills, making a career For men -worker without family obligations For women -worker burdened with family obligations Control system accepted in an organization
Power of social environment Participant and groups Control of group participants' behavior Formation of gender stereotype model of vital behavior Reproduction of vital behavior standard models For men -principal earner and a person to rely on For women-housewife Informal control of a social group
The end of table 2
Institutes Object of Aims of Functions of Disposition of gender power Control
Institutional role
(subjects) power power power Content mechanisms
Family Women Using of Maximization Family duties For men - Corresponde
power in its and men power of goods of should be well- principal nce of actions
head object's power subject defined earner and a of an object
resources in acquisition according to sex person to rely of power to
with the aim of power rent, Choice of family on power
of possibilities type, spheres of For women- disposition
appropriation of going professional housewife
of power rent beyond the limits of own resources activity, forms of spare time should correspond to the stereotype of principal earner
Nanoeconomic institutes
Internal Women Internal Modification Effect of status For men - Self-control
power and men control of of aims and stereotypes principal (fitted gender
own behavior motivation Family duties earner and a rules of
structure should be well- person to rely behaviour in
according to defined on self-identity
power subject according to sex For women- of men and
demands Behavior of men and women should correspond to gender status Employment in public sector of economy should not affect the quality of households duties housewife women)
The application of the interlevel analysis tools to the study of the institutional structure of gender power in modern Russia has revealed borders and nature of interaction between institutes belonging to different levels of hierarchy. Based on the study of a great number of correlations between the system elements the key parameters of the inefficiency of the existed system of gender power institutes in Russia have been distinguished. Among them are: formal evening-out of power borders in macrolevel institutes and strengthening of gender power concentration in microlevel institutes, unification of power disposition for subjects that are on the same level of power, non-coherence of aims and functions of institutes belonging to different levels of hierarchy, low degree of
population awareness about forms and factors of gender power manifestation, absence of feedback and horizontal connections/ties between the system elements [for more precise data see: 20].
Then with quantitative and qualitative research methods it is possible to determine the costs of restriction of possibilities of human capital realization of both men and women outside the institutional roles given by the system of gender power institutes. For example, we have found that the costs of gender power reproduction in the modern economy of Russia have different forms of demonstration: for women-low profitability of human capital in the result of existing gender discrimination in social and reproductive sectors of the economy; for
men - the under-exploitation of human capital in the result of low life expectancy and high mortality rate in working age. These gender disparities proved to reduce the effectiveness of the functioning of all economic subjects: individuals (women and men), businesses and institutes, as well as the national economy as a whole [26].
Conclusion
Everything mentioned above stipulates for the modernization of the current system of gender power institutes in modern Russia. To our mind, it is necessary to use the analysis tools of institutional changes accumulated in economics to accurately determine possible trends of optimisation of the system of institutes. In the present paper we only indicate important stages to specify strategic imperatives of the development of gender power institutes of an elitist type.
The first stage to develop the methodology of an effective strategy to alter gender power institute system is to study peculiarities of possible strategies of institutional changes, that, as it is quite know, vary in: a subject and object of alterations; nature and time of their changes; unequal in the amount of their implementation costs. As our analysis has revealed, the use of institutional projection strategy in its extended meaning is the most effective to optimize the system of gender power institutes in Russia. The extended meaning of the strategy suggests the opportunity to apply all known strategies of institutional creation as its stages, except the strategy of shock therapy, in condition that the construction of a new institute is based on the adoption of other similar institutes (or their elements) from other social-economic systems.
On the second stage it is necessary to specify the quality determinants of the present institutional system that are important to determine its quality, to choose possible transplants of the most efficient institutes systems operating in different countries and to determine the vector and the content of the alteration of the current system of gender power institutes. For example, we have formulated the following quality criteria of the system of gender power institutes: objectivity, the type of
connections between the system elements, coherence of aims and functions of the system elements, the size of the system extension, the degree of distribution, utility, the diversity level, sustainability, effectiveness and efficiency.
The third stage determines the nature and the importance to alter the operating system of gender power institutes from the direction of economic agents (men and women). We would like to stress that according to the logic of institutional alteration process suggested by Douglass North and that is currently being developed by the representatives of institutional economics it is precisely the degree of coincidence of reformers' intentions to build new institutes and the economic agents' convictions will determine the functioning efficiency of a projected institute [27, p. 80-93]. The analysis, we have made, has established, for example, that the demand for the application of the system of gender power institutes of elitist type in Russia is formed in families with elitist internal structure and in families with transitional type where the mechanisms of institutionalization of conventional gender power models of behaviour (sustainability, coordination, coupling, education and inertia) are not observed [for more details see: 28].
The final stage is to determine the trend and scenario of functioning of the system of gender power institutes of elitist type. For example, the algorithm of the formation of the development trend of the system of gender power institutes of elitist type has been developed for the economy of Russia. This algorithm provides: stage-by-stage creation of direct, inverse and horizontal connections between institutes belonging to different levels of hierarchy; the coupling mechanisms of introduced institutes with active ones; stabilization mechanisms of norms of elitist behaviour of economic agents [for more details see: 29].
Theoretical postulates and the methodological tools, developed by the author on their basis, may be used as a conceptual basis for further theoretical and empirical studies devoted to the issues of gender inequality reproduction in the retrospective of its formation, development and optimization. We believe that the use of such paradigm towards
the study of gender phenomena and processes will systematize the achievements of Russian and foreign scientists in the field of analysis of different demonstration of gender asymmetry and the mechanisms of its reduction. Although it does not mean the unification of a research program used by the scientists since the use of
regulations by different economics scientific schools is not excepted but, vice versa, will promote a further development of feminist economics methodology according to the logic of post-neoclassical stage of scientific knowledge development.
References
1. Staveren I. Feminist Economics: Setting out the Parameters. Available at: http://repub.eur.nl/ pub/22542/FemKritikpolOeko.pdf (accessed 15.04.2014).
2. Acker J. Inequality Regimes: Gender, Class, and Race in Organizations. Gender and Society, 2006, vol. 20, no. 4. Available at: www.sagepub.com/oswcondensed/study/articles/05/ Acker.pdf (accessed 20.12.2013).
3. Padmanablan M. Gender and Institutional Analysis. A Feminist Approach to Economic and Social Norms. Working Paper, no. 91. August 2010. Available at: http://www.wifa.uni-leipzig.de/filea dmin/user_upload/AP/UL-Wifa_AP91_Martina_Padmanabhan.pdf (accessed 19.12.2013).
4. Kabeer N., Subrahmanian R. Institutions, Relations and Outcomes: Framework and Tools for Gender-Aware Planning. London, Zed Books, 2001. Available at: https://www.ids.ac.uk/ files/Dp357.pdf (accessed 20.12. 2013).
5. Goetz A.M. Getting Institutions Rightfor Women in Development. London, Zed Books, 1997. 248 p.
6. Sweetman C. Feminist Economics. Available at: http://www.eif.gov.cy/mlsi/dl/ genderequality.nsf/0/12D2A22FAC60DA74C22579A6002D950A/$file/fp2p_feminist_economics_bp_english.pdf (accessed 14.12.2013).
7. Krook M.L., Mackay F. Introduction: Gender, Politics and Institutions In: Gender, Politics and Institutions: Towards a Feminist Institutionalism. M.L. Krook and F. Mackay eds. Palgrave Macmillian UK, 2011, pp. 1-20. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230303911.
8. Kenny M. Gender, Institutions and Power: A Critical Review. Politics, 2007, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 91100. doi: 10.1111/j. 1467-9256.2007.00284.x.
9. Elson D. Labour Markets as Gendered Institutions: Equality, Efficiency and Empowerment Issues. World Development, 1999, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 611-627.
10. Sainsbury D. Gender and Social-democratic Welfare Stares In: Gender and welfare state regimes. D. Sainsbury eds. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 75-116.
11. Beyeler M., Annesley C. Gendering the Institutional Reform of the Welfare State: Germany, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland In: Gender, Politics and Institutions: Towards a Feminist Institutionalism. M.L. Krook and eds. Palgrave Macmillian UK, 2011, pp. 79-94. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230303911.
12. Connell R.W. Gender. Cambridge, Polity Press, 2002. 184 p.
13. Budaeva M.B. Osobennosti gendernykh otnoshenii v al'ternativnykh ekonomicheskikh sistemakh. Avtoref. diss. kand. ekon. nauk [Peculiarities of Gender Relations in Alternative Economic Systems. Cand. econ. sci author. diss.]. St. Petersburg, 2007. 23 p. (In Russian).
14. Dement'ev V. V. Ekonomika kak sistema vlasti [Economy as the System of Power]. Donetsk, Kashtan Publ., 2003. 389 p. (In Russian).
15. Perskii Yu.K., Shchul'ts D.N. Ierarkhicheskii analiz ekonomiki: metody i modeli [Hierarchical Analysis of Economics: Methods and Models]. Ekaterinburg, Institute of Economics, The Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 2008. 203 p. (In Russian).
16. Kleiner G. Evolyutsiya institutsionalnyih sistem [The Evolution of Institutional Systems]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 2004. 240 p. (In Russian).
17. Bazueva E.V. Vlast' kak predmet issledovaniya gendernoi ekonomiki [Power as the Subject of Gender Economics Research]. Zhenshchina v rossiiskom obshchestve [Woman in Russian Society], 2011, no. 2, pp. 3-14. (In Russian).
18. Eucken W. Osnovnye printsipy ekonomicheskoi politiki [Fundamental Principles of Economic Policy]. Transl. from German, ed. L. Tsedilina, Y. Kukolev. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1995. 496 p. (In Russian).
19. Connel R.W. Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Cambridge, Polity, 1987.
352 p.
20. Bazueva E.V. Perskii Yu.K. Gendernaya ekonomika kak ierarkhicheskaya sistema [Gender Economics as a Hierarchical System]. Zhurnal ekonomicheskoi teorii [Russian Journal of Economic Theory], 2011, no. 2, pp. 7-20. (In Russian).
21. Bazueva E.V. Institut gendernoi vlasti kak kriterii effektivnosti razvitiya sovremennogo obshchestva [The Institute of Gender Power as the Criterion of Modern Development Efficiency]. Vestnik Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Vestnik of Orenburg State University], 2012, no. 8 (144), pp. 4-11. (In Russian).
22. Lebedeva N.N. Institutsional'nyi mekhanizm ekonomiki: sushchnost', struktura, razvitie [Institutional Mechanism of Economy: Nature, Structure, Development]. Volgograd, Volgograd State University Publ., 2002. 326 p. (In Russian).
23. Mezoekonomika perekhodnogo perioda: Rynki, otrasli, predpriyatiya: pod obshch. red. G.B. Kleinera [Mesoeconomics of Transition Period: Markets, Branches, Enterprises. Ed. by G.B. Kleiner]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 2001. 516 p. (In Russian).
24. Butler J. The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford, California, Stanford University Press, 1997. 218 p.
25. Ozhigova L.N. Psikhologiya gendernoi identichnosti lichnosti [Psycology of Gender Identity]. Krasnodar: Kuban State University Publ., 2006. 290 p. (In Russian).
26. Bazueva E.V. The Human Capital of Perm Region: Gender Peculiarities of Realization. Ehkonomika regiona [Economy of a Region], 2010, no. 2 (22), pp. 60-71.
27. North D. Ponimanie protsessa ekonomicheskikh izmenenii. Per. s angl. K. Martynova, N. Edel'mana [Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Transl. from Engl. by K. Martynov, N. Edel'man]. Moscow, State University of Higher School of Economics Publ., 2010. 256 p. (In Russian).
28. Bazueva E.V. Transformation of Gender Power Disposition in Modern Families as a Driving Force of Institutional Changes. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast, 2014, no. 4 (34), pp. 148-164.
29. Bazueva E.V. O traektorii razvitiya sistemy gendernoi vlasti egalitarnogo tipa v Rossii [On the Development Path of the Institutions of Egalitarian Type of Gender Power in Russia]. Ars Administrandi, 2015, no. 2, pp. 16-35. (In Russian).
The date of the manuscript receipt: 07.08.2017
Information about the Author
Bazueva Elena Valer'evna - Doctor of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor, Professor at the Department of the World and Regional Economy, Economic Theory, Perm State University (15, Bukireva st., Perm, 614990, Russia; e-mail: [email protected]).
Сведения об авторе
Базуева Елена Валерьевна - доктор экономических наук, доцент, профессор кафедры мировой и региональной экономики, экономической теории, Пермский государственный национальный исследовательский университет (Россия, 614990, г. Пермь, ул. Букирева, 15; e-mail: [email protected]).
Просьба ссылаться на эту статью в русскоязычных источниках следующим образом:
Bazueva E.V. Gender power institute concept as a trend to develop methods of gender economics: theoretical background of the issue // Вестник Пермского университета. Сер. «Экономика» = Perm University Herald. Economy. 2017. Том 12. № 3. С. 375-387. doi: 10.17072/1994-9960-2017-3-375-387
Please cite this article in English as:
Bazueva E.V. Gender power institute concept as a trend to develop methods of gender economics: theoretical background of the issue. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Seria Ekonomika = Perm University Herald. Economy, 2017, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 375-387. doi: 10.17072/1994-9960-2017-3-375-387
