This policy paper adapts the framework used by Chopra, Kelbert and Iyer (2013[1]) to conduct a political economy analysis of how unpaid care concerns are considered with regard to early childhood development and social protection policies. The authors’ framework looks at the intent and design of polices as well as their implementation and outcomes to determine which combinations of actors, institutions, ideas and incentives, and windows of opportunity/moments in time are conducive to the adoption of policies dealing with unpaid care. The authors also identify key issues that have not been adequately addressed in the literature so far. These issues are the interests, motivations and interactions of different players working to incorporate unpaid care; how the choice of specific pathways to achieve the 3Rs is made; whether enough resources are allocated to achieve the intended policy outcomes; and evidence as to whether in fact these outcomes have been achieved.
Broadening the approach used by Chopra, Kelbert and Iyer to cover programmes as well as policies and to address some of the gaps identified, the analysis for this report focuses on the following main questions (See Annex B for a more detailed list of questions used in the interview process):
What approaches to infrastructure, social protection, public services and promoting shared responsibility within the household to address women’s unpaid care work have been attempted in different contexts?
What works to achieve the 3Rs, and in which context?
Which coalitions of actors have been instrumental to adopting new policies and programmes?
What targeted strategies or interventions are needed to achieve the 3Rs for different groups (e.g. age group or stage in the life cycle, location, marital status, socio-economic background, labour market status, or other marginalisation factors such as disability)?
What different resource models have been tried in infrastructure, social protection and public services to address women’s unpaid care work?
The analysis focuses on interventions that recognise and intentionally address unpaid care work as well as on those that do not aim to address the issue but that have had or have the potential to significantly reduce and/or redistribute unpaid care work. It aims to look beyond how programmes and policies work to see how understanding of unpaid care work is evolving over time, which key actors are involved in designing and adopting policies and programmes, and why certain approaches have been chosen over others. Where possible, the analysis also notes how policies and programmes address the realities of unpaid care work across different social groups. This is a relatively neglected research area, but one greatly important for both the inclusive growth and “leave no one behind” agendas. This analysis aims to reach the poorest and most marginalised groups but require proactive measures that address inequalities among individuals (i.e. men and women in the same household, or women of different ages) and groups (i.e. rural, urban, indigenous, etc.).