Description
This paper is a feminist interrogation of the concept of productivity within political economy. It begins by exploring some of the dominant and explicit definitions of productivity from economics textbooks, before identifying some of the more implicit uses of the concept across contemporary political economy debates, including those around stagnation, inequality, automation, and the potential for a green transition. While this discussion does not cover every use of the concept, it identifies a persistent trend, whereby productivity is understood as separate from the gendered and racialised power dynamics of the economy.
The paper then explores productivity by breaking it down into its key components of inputs and outputs. Inputs, in particular labour inputs, are measured in ways that elide the gendered and racialised nature of work and pay, and that in general mis-understand the ways that wages are politically, and not technically, determined. Output, for the purposes of measuring productivity, is generally seen as synonymous with Gross Domestic Product, a measure that has been subject to significant critique from feminist economics amongst others. By exploring productivity at this component level, the paper shows how it is at best a flawed measure, and at worst a distorting one.
The paper focuses on the measurement of productivity within the UK, speaking directly to the so-called ‘productivity puzzle’ and to on-going attempts by scholars and policy makers to improve this measurement. Moreover, it highlights how debates within political economy over how to characterise our current economic moment are inherently partial when built upon this conceptualisation of productivity. As such, this paper shows the importance of feminist political economy insights.
