Paper short abstract:

This paper discusses the use of indicators in Gender and Development. I argue that, while indicators have been used to de-radicalise the project of gender equality, this is not an intrinsic property. Hence, it is possible to reclaim them to support a transformative version of gender equality.

Paper long abstract:

Quantitative indicators appear to offer an "objective" and "transparent" tool for decision-making. However, who decides what to measure and how to measure it matters: Indicators have underlying frameworks that are obscured behind the veil of ‘technical’ choices.

In the field of development, indicators have played a crucial role not only in monitoring development projects, but, more importantly in the conceptualisation of the category and its attached identities. This paper discusses the use of indicators in Gender and Development using a feminist framework and a political economy approach. Feminist advocates have often conflicting views on the use of indicators. On the one hand, indicators have been a crucial piece of the strategy for gaining institutional support from powerful actors. On the other hand, some feminists have been sceptical about the ability of measurements to capture the complexities and aspirations articulated in the catchphrase of “gender equality”.

Using as a case study how care work has been conceptualised in the Sustainable Development Goals indicator framework, I identify how quantitative data has been instrumental in supporting reformist narratives linked to Gender and Development. I argue that, while in the past indicators have played a key role in de-radicalising the project of gender equality, this is not an intrinsic property: Indicators are not per se regressive, they serve regressive purposes because of who is behind their production. Therefore, it is possible to reclaim quantitative data and use it to reframe and redirect the discussion towards a more transformative version of gender equality.