In this paper I develop a critique of both standard neoclassical and standard Marxian conceptualizations of human capital that illustrates an important hypothesis of feminist political economy: collective conflicts based on class, gender, and age, as well as other dimensions of collective identity, affect the distribution of the costs of developing human capital.
BabcockL.LascheverS.2007. Women don’t ask. New York: Random House.
2.
BeckerG.1964. Human capital. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research and Columbia University Press.
3.
BeckerG.1993. A treatise on the family, rev. ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4.
BeckerG.1996. Accounting for tastes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
BowlesS.1985. The production process in a competitive economy: Walrasian, neo-Hobbesian, and Marxian models. American Economic Review75 (1): 16-36.
6.
BowlesS.GintisH.1977. Schooling in capitalist America. New York: Basic Books.
7.
BowlesS.GintisH.OsborneM.2001. Incentive-enhancing preferences: Personal, behavior, and earnings. The American Economic Review91 (2): 155-58.
8.
BraunsteinE.2011Patriarchy versus Islam: Gender and religion in economic growth. Manuscript.
9.
BraunsteinE.2008. The feminist political economy of the rent-seeking society. Journal of Economic Issues42 (4): 1-21.
10.
BraunsteinE.FolbreN.2001. To honor and obey: Efficiency, inequality, and patriarchal property rights. Feminist Economics7 (1): 25-54.
11.
BraunsteinE.Van StaverenI.TavaniD.2011. Embedding care and unpaid work in macroeconomic modeling: A structuralist approach. Feminist Economics17 (4): 5-32.
12.
CorrellS.BenardS.PaikI.2007. Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty?American Journal of Sociology112 (5): 1,297-1,338.
13.
CoxD.StarkO.1996. Intergenerational transfers and the “demonstration effect.”Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
14.
CoxD.StarkO.2005. On the demand for grandchildren: Tied transfers and the demonstration effect. Journal of Public Economics89 (9-10): 1,665-97.
15.
CunhaF.HeckmanJ.2010. Investing in our young people. IZA Discussion Paper 5050.
16.
EhrenreichB.EhrenreichJ.1979. Between labor and capital. Boston: South End Press.
17.
FogelR.W.EngermanS.1974. Time on the cross. The economics of American negro slavery. New York: Little Brown.
18.
FolbreN.2011. The rise and decline of patriarchal capitalism. Paper presented at conference honoring Tom Weisskopf, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts Amherst, September.
19.
FolbreN.2010. Saving State U: Why we must save public higher education. New York: The New Press.
20.
FolbreN.2009. Greed, lust, and gender: A history of economic ideas. New York: Oxford.
21.
FolbreN.2008. Valuing children: Rethinking the economics of the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
22.
FolbreN.2006. Chicks, hawks, and patriarchal institutions. In Handbook of behavioral economics, ed. AltmanM., 499-516. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
23.
FolbreN.1998. Gender coalitions: Extrafamily influences on intrafamily inequality. In Intrahousehold resource allocation in developing countries: Methods, models and policy, ed. HaddadL.HoddinottJ.AldermanH.Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
24.
GeddesR.LueckD.2002. The gains from self-ownership and the expansion of women’s rights. American Economic Review92 (4): 1,079-1,092.
25.
HirshleiferJ.2001. The dark side of the force. Economic foundations of conflict theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
LernerG.1986. The creation of patriarchy. New York: Oxford University Press.
27.
McElroyM.1990. The empirical content of Nash-bargained household behavior. Journal of Human Resources25 (4): 559-98.
28.
MeillassouxC.1971. Maidens, meal and money. Capitalism and the domestic community. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29.
NoveA.1983. The economics of feasible socialism. New York: Psychology Press.
30.
NussbaumM. C.2010. Creating capabilities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31.
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). 2010. Atlas of gender and development: How social norms affect gender equality in non-OECD countries. Paris: OECD.
32.
RoemerJ.1994. Egalitarian perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.
33.
WilliamsJ. C.BornsteinS.2007. The evolution of “FReD”: Family responsibilities discrimination and developments in the law of stereotyping and implicit bias. Hastings Law Journal59: 1,311-1,358.
34.
WrightE.O.CostelloC.HachenD.SpragueJ.1982. The American class structure. American Sociological Review47 (6): 709-726.
