Sometimes our definitions fall short. Take, for example, the way we view income and labor. It simply doesn’t cover enough of the work that women, and in particular poor women, are doing – especially in their own households and the vast ‘informal’ economy in which most of the world’s poorest people work.
People feel they are not participating in the decision-making process. Decisions are exclusive to those at the very top. You have grown up with crony capitalism and it creates ever more resentment.
Many developing countries are enjoying demographic changes. They have a younger demographic composition so they’re not burdened by legacy policy. Now, if you combine this with a good macro policy and ambitious structural policy, those countries are able to move more flexibly and be more agile.
So much research has been done showing that the woman is the most vulnerable but also the biggest strength leading to economic progress.
I have my own experience in Indonesia, of course. Sometimes in these transition situations, the new governments are still clumsy and awkward in responding to this new environment in which they operate. The only thing in their DNA is the old regime.
People now, especially with the Internet, are connected. They have an expectation of behaviour, of accountability, avoiding conflict and fair and just competition.
If women had equal access to fertilizer and modern farm machinery, developing countries would produce between 2.5-percent and 4-percent more food.
In the 1990s, I was among those Indonesians who demanded and celebrated the departure of our own autocrat, Suharto, and I joined the new government when he left.
Women are often paid far less than men, while they also perform most of the world’s unpaid care work.
I think the implications for the rise of China are huge in terms of the political landscape, economic balance, de-velopment thinking, and the environment.
Pages: 1 2
