非洲的移民总是由家庭决定的吗?加纳妇女城乡移民决策中的共识与争议

IF 3.3 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Feminist Economics Pub Date : 2022-04-03 DOI:10.1080/13545701.2022.2042473
Lynda Pickbourn
{"title":"非洲的移民总是由家庭决定的吗?加纳妇女城乡移民决策中的共识与争议","authors":"Lynda Pickbourn","doi":"10.1080/13545701.2022.2042473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The dominant theoretical framework for analyzing migration in Africa rests on the assumption of cooperative intrahousehold decision making regarding the mobility of household members. This framework, applied to women’s migration, overlooks the varied decision-making processes underlying their mobility, and obscures their ability to act as purposeful agents in making decisions about migration. Drawing on a study of women’s rural–urban migration in Ghana, this article argues that women’s migration decisions exist on a continuum defined by the presence or absence of intrahousehold contestation and the degree of agency exercised by the migrants themselves. Consequently, household models of migration may not always be the appropriate theoretical framework for the analysis of women’s migration in this context. The findings presented have implications for economic analyses of women’s migration and remittances, for our understanding of migrant women’s capacity for agency, and for the design of effective policies to improve migration outcomes for women. HIGHLIGHTS The study directly elicits information from women about their migration decisions. Women’s migration is the outcome of complex decision-making processes. The dichotomy between household and individual models of migration ignores these complexities.","PeriodicalId":47715,"journal":{"name":"Feminist Economics","volume":"28 1","pages":"64 - 92"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is Migration in Africa always a Household Decision? Consensus and Contestation in the Rural–Urban Migration Decisions of Ghanaian Women\",\"authors\":\"Lynda Pickbourn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13545701.2022.2042473\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The dominant theoretical framework for analyzing migration in Africa rests on the assumption of cooperative intrahousehold decision making regarding the mobility of household members. This framework, applied to women’s migration, overlooks the varied decision-making processes underlying their mobility, and obscures their ability to act as purposeful agents in making decisions about migration. Drawing on a study of women’s rural–urban migration in Ghana, this article argues that women’s migration decisions exist on a continuum defined by the presence or absence of intrahousehold contestation and the degree of agency exercised by the migrants themselves. Consequently, household models of migration may not always be the appropriate theoretical framework for the analysis of women’s migration in this context. The findings presented have implications for economic analyses of women’s migration and remittances, for our understanding of migrant women’s capacity for agency, and for the design of effective policies to improve migration outcomes for women. HIGHLIGHTS The study directly elicits information from women about their migration decisions. Women’s migration is the outcome of complex decision-making processes. The dichotomy between household and individual models of migration ignores these complexities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47715,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Feminist Economics\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"64 - 92\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Feminist Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2022.2042473\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Feminist Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2022.2042473","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

分析非洲移民的主要理论框架建立在关于家庭成员流动性的家庭内部合作决策的假设之上。这一框架适用于妇女移民,忽视了她们流动性背后的各种决策过程,并掩盖了她们作为有目的的代理人做出移民决策的能力。根据对加纳妇女农村-城市移民的研究,本文认为,妇女的移民决定存在于一个连续体上,该连续体由是否存在家庭内部竞争和移民自身行使的代理权程度来定义。因此,在这种情况下,家庭移徙模式可能并不总是分析妇女移徙的适当理论框架。所提出的调查结果对妇女移民和汇款的经济分析、我们对移民妇女的代理能力的理解以及制定有效政策以改善妇女移民成果都有影响。亮点这项研究直接从妇女那里获得了关于她们移民决定的信息。妇女移徙是复杂决策过程的结果。家庭和个人移民模式之间的二分法忽略了这些复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Is Migration in Africa always a Household Decision? Consensus and Contestation in the Rural–Urban Migration Decisions of Ghanaian Women
The dominant theoretical framework for analyzing migration in Africa rests on the assumption of cooperative intrahousehold decision making regarding the mobility of household members. This framework, applied to women’s migration, overlooks the varied decision-making processes underlying their mobility, and obscures their ability to act as purposeful agents in making decisions about migration. Drawing on a study of women’s rural–urban migration in Ghana, this article argues that women’s migration decisions exist on a continuum defined by the presence or absence of intrahousehold contestation and the degree of agency exercised by the migrants themselves. Consequently, household models of migration may not always be the appropriate theoretical framework for the analysis of women’s migration in this context. The findings presented have implications for economic analyses of women’s migration and remittances, for our understanding of migrant women’s capacity for agency, and for the design of effective policies to improve migration outcomes for women. HIGHLIGHTS The study directly elicits information from women about their migration decisions. Women’s migration is the outcome of complex decision-making processes. The dichotomy between household and individual models of migration ignores these complexities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Feminist Economics
Feminist Economics Multiple-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: Feminist Economics is a peer-reviewed journal that provides an open forum for dialogue and debate about feminist economic perspectives. By opening new areas of economic inquiry, welcoming diverse voices, and encouraging critical exchanges, the journal enlarges and enriches economic discourse. The goal of Feminist Economics is not just to develop more illuminating theories but to improve the conditions of living for all children, women, and men. Feminist Economics: -Advances feminist inquiry into economic issues affecting the lives of children, women, and men -Examines the relationship between gender and power in the economy and the construction and legitimization of economic knowledge -Extends feminist theoretical, historical, and methodological contributions to economics and the economy -Offers feminist insights into the underlying constructs of the economics discipline and into the historical, political, and cultural context of economic knowledge -Provides a feminist rethinking of theory and policy in diverse fields, including those not directly related to gender -Stimulates discussions among diverse scholars worldwide and from a broad spectrum of intellectual traditions, welcoming cross-disciplinary and cross-country perspectives, especially from countries in the South
期刊最新文献
Dispossession after War: A Feminist Political Economy Perspective Analysis of Seasonal Time Poverty and Aspirations in the Upper East Region of Ghana The Value of Work: The Gendered Outcomes of Organizational Wage Reforms Feminist Ideologies at Work: Culture, Collectivism, and Entrepreneurship among Disadvantaged Women in India Women’s Colleges and Economics Major Choice: Evidence from Wellesley College Applicants
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1