Care is performed at the intersections of various social differentiations in which its gendering appears tenacious. This article delineates four thematic clusters that variously focus on the work, relations, practices and politics of care, and elaborates on some organising concepts, studies and arguments. These framings overlap and question each other: the sexual division of labour, mothering, the economic and social value of women’s domestic work and the work/care regime; gendered critiques of welfare regimes and a care regime; the care economy, a sharpening care crisis and care deficit with neo-liberal policies and demands for a work–life balance; and the rationalities, biopolitics and governmentalities of the social organisation and morality of care. Discussions diverge and converge in debates on the making of gender relations in work and political economy. Taking the labour of care seriously in the struggle against women’s subordination and gender inequalities appears inescapable.
AntonopoulosR., & HirwayI. (Eds.). (2010). Unpaid work and the economy: Gender, time use and poverty in developing countries. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
2.
BairdM., FordM., & HillE. (Eds.). (2017). Women, work and care in the Asia-Pacific. New York, NY and London, UK: Routledge.
3.
BeneriaL., & SenG. (1986). Boserup revisited. In LeacockE. & SafaH. I. (Eds.), Women’s work: Development and the division of labour by gender (pp. 141–157). South Hadley, MA: Bergin and Garvey Publishers.
4.
BoserupE. (1974). Women’s role in economic development. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
5.
BrownJ. K. (1970). A note on the division of labor by sex. American Anthropologist, 72(5), 1073–1078.
6.
BudlenderD. (2008). The statistical evidence on care and non-care work across six countries. Geneva, Switzerland: UNRISD.
7.
CollinsP. H. (1994). Shifting the center: Race, class, and feminist theorizing about motherhood. In GlennE. N., ChangG. & ForceyL. R. (Eds.), Mothering: Ideology, experience, and agency (pp. 45–65). New York, NY: Routledge.
8.
Dalla CostaM., & JamesS. (1975). The power of women and the subversion of the community. Bristol, UK: Falling Wall Press Ltd.
9.
DavisA. Y. (1981). Women, race, and class. New York, NY: Vintage.
10.
DraperP. (1975). !Kung women: Contrasts in sexual egalitarianism in foraging and sedentary contexts. In ReiterR. R. (Ed.), Toward an anthropology of women (pp. 77–109). New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.
EhrenreichB., & HochschildA. R. (Eds.). (2002). Global women: Nannies, maids and sex workers in the new economy. New York, NY: Holt.
13.
EisensteinZ. R. (Ed.) (1978). Capitalist patriarchy and the case for socialist feminism. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.
14.
ElsonD., & CagatayN. (2000). The social content of macro-economic policies. World Development, 28(7), 1347–1364.
15.
EngelsF. (1972). The origin of the family, private property and the state. London, UK: Lawrence and Wishart.
16.
Esping-AndersenG. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
FolbreN. (1994). Who pays for the kids? Gender and the structures of constraint. London, UK: Routledge.
18.
FolbreN., & BittmanM. (Eds.). (2004). Family time: The social organization of care. London, UK: Routledge.
19.
FoucaultM. (1997). Ethics: Subjectivity and truth. The essential works of M. Foucault 1954–1984, Vol. I (Ed. RabinowP.). New York, NY: The New Press.
20.
FraserN. (1989). Unruly practices: Power, discourse, and gender in contemporary social theory. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
21.
FraserN. (2013). Fortunes of feminism: From state-managed capitalism to neoliberal crisis. New York, NY: Verso Books.
22.
FraserN. (2016). Contradictions of capital and care. New Left Review, 100, 99–117.
23.
GilliganC. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24.
GlenE. N. (1986). Issei. Nisei, War Bride: Three Generations of Japanese American Women in Domestic Service. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
25.
GlennE. N. (2010). Forced to care: Coercion and caregiving in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26.
Government of India (2007). Towards mainstreaming time use surveys in national statistical system in India. In Proceedings of the International Seminar on Towards Mainstreaming Time Use Surveys in National Statistical System in India, 24–25 May, Goa. New Delhi, India: Ministry of Women and Child Development.
27.
HarrisO. (1981). Households as natural units. In YoungK., WolkowitzC. & McCullaghR. (Eds.), Of marriage and the market: Women’s subordination in international perspective (pp. 49–68). London, UK: CSE Books.
28.
HillE. (2007). Budgeting for work-life balance: The ideology and politics of work and family policy in Australia. Australian Bulletin of Labour, 33(2), 226–245.
29.
HirwayI. (1999, December7–10). Estimating work force using time use statistics in India and its implications for employment policies. Paper presented at the International Seminar on Time Use Studies (UNESCAP), Ahmedabad, India.
30.
HirwayI. (2005). Integrating unpaid work into development policy. In Levy Economics Institute (Ed.), Conference on ‘Unpaid work and economy: Gender, poverty and Millennium Development Goals’ (pp. 1–3). New York, NY: Levy Economics Institute.
31.
HirwayI. (2015). Unpaid work and the economy: Linkages and their implications. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 58(1), 1–21.
32.
HochschildA. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
33.
HochschildA. R. (1995). The culture of politics: Traditional, postmodern, cold modern, and warm modern ideals of care. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 2(3), 331–346.
34.
HolmwoodJ. (2000). Three pillars of welfare state theory. T. H. Marshall, Karl Polanyi and Alva Myrdal in defence of the national welfare state. European Journal of Social Theory, 3(1), 23–50.
35.
JainD. (1985). The household trap: A report on a field survey of female economic patterns. In JainD., & BanerjeeN. (Eds.), Tyranny of the household (pp. 215–257). New Delhi, India: Shakti Books.
36.
JensonJ. (1997). Who cares? Gender and welfare regimes. Social Politics, 4(2), 182–187.
37.
KabeerN. (2010). Gender and social protection strategies in the informal economy. New Delhi, India: Routledge.
38.
KnijnG. C. M. (2000). Marketization and the struggling logics of (home) care in the Netherlands. In MeyerM. H. (Ed.), Care work, gender, labor and the welfare state (pp. 232–248). London, UK: Routledge.
39.
KnijnT., MartinC., & Le BihanB. (2013). Introduction: Workers under pressure and social care arrangements. A research framework. In Le BihanB., MartinC. & KnijnT. (Eds.), Work and care under pressure: Care arrangements across Europe (pp. 4–29). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.
40.
LaschC. (1976). The family as a haven in a heartless world. Salmagundi, 35, 42–55.
41.
LewisJ. (1992). Gender and the development of welfare regimes. Journal of European Social Policy, 2(3), 159–173.
42.
LewisJ. (1997). Gender and welfare regimes: Further thoughts. Social Politics, 4(1), 160–177.
43.
MarshallT. H. (1964). Class, citizenship and social development. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
44.
MazumdarI. (2007). Women workers and globalization: Emergent contradictions in India. Kolkata: Stree.
45.
MazumdarI., & NeethaN. (2011). Gender dimensions: Employment trends in India, 1993–94 to 2009–10. Economic and Political Weekly, XLVI(43), 118–126.
46.
MiesM. (1998). Patriarchy and accumulation on a world scale: Women in the international division of labour. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
47.
MolyneuxM. (1979). Beyond the domestic labour debate. New Left Review, 116, 3–27.
48.
NeethaN., & PalriwalaR. (2010). Unpaid care work: Analysis of the Indian time use data. In BudlenderD. (Ed.), Time use studies and unpaid care work (pp. 92–117). New York, NY and Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
49.
OchiaiE., & MolonyB. (Eds.). (2008). Asia’s new mothers: Crafting gender roles and childcare networks in East and Southeast Asian societies. Folkestone, UK: Global Oriental.
50.
OngA. (1987). Spirits of resistance and capitalist development. Albany, NY: SUNY.
51.
OrloffA. S. (1993). Gender and the social rights of citizenship: The comparative analysis of gender relations and welfare states. American Sociological Review, 58(3), 303–328.
52.
PalriwalaR., & NeethaN. (2010). Care arrangements and bargains: Anganwadi and paid domestic workers in India. International Labour Review, 149(4), 511–527.
53.
PalriwalaR., & NeethaN. (2011). Stratified familialism: The care regime in India through the lens of childcare. Development and Change, 42(4), 1049–1078.
54.
ParrenasR. S. (2001). Servants of globalization: Women, migration and domestic work. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
55.
PatemanC. (1989). The patriarchal welfare state. In The disorder of women: Democracy, feminism, and political theory (pp. 179–209). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
56.
PocockB. (2005). Work/care regimes: Institutions, culture and behaviour and the Australian case. Gender, Work and Organization, 12(1), 32–49.
57.
RazaviS. (2007). The political and social economy of care in a development context. Geneva, Switzerland: UNRISD.
58.
RazaviS. (Ed.). (2012). Seen, heard and counted: Rethinking care in a development context. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
59.
RisseeuwC., GaneshK., & PalriwalaR. (2005). Care, culture and citizenship: Revisiting the politics of welfare in the Netherlands. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Spinhuis.
60.
SainsburyD. (Ed.). (1994). Gendering welfare states. London, UK: SAGE Publications.
61.
TrontoJ. C. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. London, UK: Routledge.
62.
TrontoJ. C. (2012). Democratic care politics in an age of limits. In RazaviS. & StaabS. (Eds.), Worlds apart: Global variations in the political and social economy of care (pp. 29–40). London, UK: Routledge.
63.
TrontoJ. C. (2013). Caring democracy: Markets, equality and justice. New York, NY: New York University Press.
