Covid-19 and the Gender Dilemma: Shortcomings in both Macroeconomics and Feminist (Gender) Economics

The Covid-19 crisis catapulted women to a new found public visibility as hardly ever happened before. During the first general lock-down in March 2020, women were serenaded from European balconies for providing ‘essential’ economic and social services. In addition, women leaders were extolled as the better decision-makers in managing the crisis. Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, suggests that women leaders in Germany, Taiwan, New Zealand, outperformed their male counterparts during the pandemic. She cites better communication, transparency in sharing scientific data and numbers, and the ability to stress the ‘caring dimension’. The erstwhile euphoria putting women center stage soon crashed with reality. Given the conundrum between serenading ‘essential’ workers during the Covid-crisis and the subsequent silence of gender inclusivity, I intend to analyze why the issue of gender inequality is largely absent in public high-level recovery plans issued to cope with the economic and health impacts of the Covid crisis, and subsequent suggestions for a transformation to a post-Covid 21st century. For this purpose, I will investigate the Recovery plans and reports issued by the European Union, the OECD, and the Chatham House to illustrate the gender blindness in these reports. As a tentative hypothesis, I suggest that many economists focus first and foremost on the macroeconomy while feminist economists focus on the microlevel of the household and the care economy. These two approaches produce distinct outcomes for men and women. What is missing in both perspectives is a link between the two interconnected levels of the economy. Due to these weaknesses, I will introduce some transformative new studies by economists such as Mariana Mazzucato and her mission-oriented approach to tackle challenges facing modern societies, as well as Maja Göpel, and Kate Raworth who focus on the public purpose of the economy and not just the profit motive inherent in capitalist production. While these authors do not identify as feminist economists, nevertheless they look at the economy from a systemic and holistic perspective and suggest how to think about the economy: ‘what it is, how it works and what it is for’. These innovative approaches set a new direction for gender experts to devise mission-oriented well-defined goals as well as the instruments necessary to achieve a more level-playing field with (mainly male) economic policy makers for designing gender-inclusive transformative recovery plans for a sustainable 21st century post-Covid world.