1

New Woman Foundation

The Value of Women’s unpaid Housework in Egypt

Dr. Salwa El-Antery

2

Index

Introduction 2

Chapter 1

Houseworkin Economic Thought 5

Chapter 2

International Experiences to assess the Value of Un-paid Domestic work 21

First: Measuring Unpaid housework hours 21

Second: monetary estimation of Unpaid housework 24

Third: Measuring and valuation of Unpaid housework in Egypt 25

Fourth: Main Impact of Measuring and Estimation of Women’s Unpaid Housework 27

Chapter 3

Methodology for measuring and estimation of Egyptian women’s unpaid housework 39

Chapter 4

Applying Methodology and Analysis of Results 49

Conclusions and Recommendations 72

References 81

Statistical Appendices 85

3

Introduction

Women in Egypt are accused of being reluctant to participate in the economic activities. Official data

and reports repeat over and again that women’s participation in the Labour power does not exceed

22%, which is one of the lowest in the world. The prevailing terminology referring to unemployed

women is “settled at home” implying that women outside the market are indulged in a state of

relaxation and leisure, despite the actual reality, where these women are swamped for long hours in

house chores and that may not have enough time to rest.

This study aims to assess the actual value of Egyptian women’s participation in the economy through

measuring and estimating the amount of unpaid housework of these women. According to the

National Accounting System that all UN member states abide by, the unpaid housework work is

excluded as it is not considered an economic market activity. This means that a god amount of

women actual participation in economic activities, despite its importance to the welfare of the

community as a whole, remain unrecognized or valued, and that the total participation of women in

economic activities is underestimated, which in itself negatively impacts women’s social status and

their ability to participate in decision making.

There is a variety of studies on Egyptian women and labor market, yet there is rarity in economic

studies addressing measuring and distribution of housework within the family. Partly, this could be

explained by novelty and limited availability of data on time use in Egypt. The first trial in this

regard is the Economic Research Forum (ERF) study published in June 2010, “Rethinking Time

Allocation of Egyptian Women”. The study focused on measuring women’s working hours on

housework and the impact of marriage in increasing this type of work and reducing the time

available for paid work. To our knowledge, the study is the first trial ever, to estimate the monetary

value of women’s housework in Egypt, and its percentage of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

The study is divided to four chapters. The first, deals with the concept of un-paid housework and the

evolution of economic thought and national statistics’ systems with regards to this kind of work. The

second chapter reviews international experiences to measure and estimate the value of un-paid

domestic work and their results. The third chapter is dedicated to explaining the methodology used to

measure and estimate women’s housework in Egypt. The fourth chapter presents the results of using

the methodology, and provides recommendations

4

This trial to estimate and acknowledge the value of women’s unpaid housework in Egypt, is by no

means a call for limiting women to housework, or going back to concepts that have been transcend

by humanity whether at the level of social development or at the level of economic thought and

analysis. Those concepts are based on preset division of labor and fields of activities, and had the

presumptions that market paid labor is men’s domain, whilst unpaid houseworkis women’s domain.

Estimating the value of women’s houseworkin Egypt, in our view, represents an essential step in

estimating the overall actual economic participation of Egyptian women compared to the overall

economic participation of men, as an objective basis for enhancing women’s social status, and their

right to participation in decision making, and in achieving balance between social responsibilities

and work. We hope this trial will be an effort to build upon at different levels; research, feminist

movements and national statistics.

On a personal level, I would like to express my deep appreciation for the New Woman Foundation

for taking the initiative to address such an important issue. I am also indebted to the ERF for

allowing me to use the raw data of the labor market follow up survey. My thanks to Mr. Khaled

Maher program developer in CAPMAS for his invaluable help on how to deal with the survey data

using the STATA program.

5

Chapter 1

Housework in Economic Thought

Unpaid housework concept entails all services which are being produced and consumed for

free within the family; i.e. services provided by family members to each other, house chores,

preparation and providing meals, purchasing needed supplies, transportation of family members to

different places, care for the sick and older family members, etc, of such services that are primarily

carried out by women.

Unpaid housework resembles many paid labor activities in the community, e..g. domestic

services, child and geriatric care, some nursing activities, yet, contrary to the paid services, unpaid

housework is not included within the GDP according to the System of National Accounts (SNAs),

prepared by the United Nations and is applied to different world countries,1

In fact the SNAs is only concerned with goods and services which have market value. It can

be said that the GDP value is derived mainly from the sum of all market values of all goods which

are produced and sold in the market; and all services that are paid for. Even when there are goods

and services that are not actually exchanged in the market; but could be sold and have specific price,

then it can be included in the national accounts through specified “estimated value”, as is the case

with the amount of the harvest kept by farmers for family consumption (subsistence economy), or the

estimated rental value for the residential home . But, housework services and all community

voluntary services are not included in the GDP2

The system of national accounts (SNA) acknowledges that all housework activities are economically

productive, and that the time used in it enhances community welfare3 However, there are some

factors that make it hard to integrate these services in the GDP is that the production and

1The most recent document in this regard is the UN document on Systems of National Accounts 2008. It was prepared

under the auspices of the United Nation, European Commission and OECD, IMF and the World Bank Group. It was an

updating of the SNA 1998 in response to the UN Statistics Committee request; the committee adopted unanimously the

SNA 2008 as the International Statistics’ Standard for national accounts, and urged world countries to collate its national

accounts and report on it according to this system

2 Previous source page 63

3 Previous source page 70

6

consumption of these services is not linked with monetary flow, thus does not help analyzing what

might happen with regards to economic inflation or recession. Including such non-monetary

transactions would obscure what is actually happening in the markets, and limits decision maker’s

ability to take appropriate measure. On the other hand, the labor power statistics define

economically active persons as those who are participating in the production process as defined in

the SNA. If the definition is extended to include the production of personal services provided by

family members for their own consumption, then all persons involved in these activities would be

considered as employed, making unemployment impossible from a theoretical point of view.

Hence, “the need to restrict the production limit in the SNA and other statistical systems to market

activities or fairly close alternatives to market activities”4

According to this concept, we have two important issues. First, part of the community production is

not taken into consideration i.e. the total production in different societies is under estimated. Second,

directly relevant to the subject of this study, huge big part of women’s actual participation in

economic activities, despite its importance to the community welfare, remains unacknowledged and

its value is not calculated resulting in underestimation of the total women’s participation in economic

activities. This in itself negatively impacts women’s social status and their ability to participate in

decision making

The economic thought had addressed the issue of unpaid housework, particularly for women, in a

number of key trajectories; the capitalist, Marxist and feminist economic thought, and issues related

to preparations of national accounts.

First: Evolution of the preparations of national accounts,

and position from women’s unpaid Housework

Declaring that women’s unpaid housework as a non-productive labor is associated with the

developments in preparing national accounts in England and the United states of America late

nineteenth century.5

The issue was settled by 1890, when a parliamentarian committee was

established in England to improve the preparations of national censuses. The Committee resorted to

4 SNA 2008 page 63

5 For detailed presentation of this evolution see Nancy Folbre, The Unproductive Housewife: Her Evolution in

Nineteenth Century Economic Thought, Journal of women in Culture and society, the University of Chicago, 1991, p.

465-478

7

the famous economic thinker Alfred Marshal who noted that the number of “none working”

population in the censuses in England was much higher than the numbers in the censuses in

Germany. The reason, was the inclusion of persons economically dependent on others within that

category (children, sick, older persons and married women devoted solely to housework), and that

the proper classification for this group of population should be as “dependants/un-independent”,

similar to what was already being used in Germany’s censuses. In 1891, England’s census included

unpaid married women in the “dependants” category, referring that all unpaid housework of women

has been excluded, and if these activities were included the percentage of working women would be

close to the percentage of working men.6

Envisioning housework as none productive and considering women as economically un-independent

was gradually adopted also in censuses in USA (second half of the nineteenth century) and was

finally settled in the 1900 census. The census affirmed that the “bread winners” category does not

include retired persons or wives and daughters who live in the household and their work is limited to

helping in unpaid housework. Thus, daughters and wives were included in the “dependants”

category.7

Naturally, the feminist movement in the second half of the nineteenth century in both England and

USA contested the exclusion of women’s housework from population censuses. Most prominent in

these contests in England was the efforts of the National Women's Suffrage Association (NWSA) to

make alliances with some progressive Chambers of Commerce to adopt the point of view of NWSA

members that “the theoretical concept that a wife who bears a fair share of the burdens of common

life is being fed by the husband is a destruction for the whole community”8

In USA, the Association of the Advancement of Women (AAW) presented an official memorandum

to the Congress 1878 contesting neglecting the work of12 million American women and considering

house wives as non-productive laborers, because they are not paid for their work. The memorandum

called upon the Congress to include women in the censuses under the category of productive

laborers9

By the beginning of the twentieth century, using term the “dependants” to categorize married women

who do not work for wages outside the house became as settled scientific fact. Women’s economic

dependency became the argument to justify their low wages; women do not need wages for survival,

6 Nancy Folbre, IBID, p. 474

7 Nancy Folbre, IBID, p. 477

8 Elizabeth Blackwell, Cited in William Leach, True Love and Perfect Union, New York, 1980, p. 193

9 Nancy Folbre, IBID, appendix, p 483.

8

but men have the right to ask for higher wages because they sustain their wives. If Alfred Marshal

was the first to explicitly exclude housework from the economic accounts, however, this trend was

further crystallized by his student Arthur Cecil Pigou, the champion of welfare economies thought,

who defined the National income as the value of producing all goods and services that can be

purchased directly or indirectly by money. To further explain, Pigou gave his famous example, if a

house keeper works for a single young man and then married him, the national income will decline,

since she will have to conduct all her previously paid service for free after marriage!10

the mainstream trend in the late nineteenth century was to exclude women’s housework from

population censuses. However, some of the economists participating in the early trials to assess

the GDP in Sweden, England and the USA, during the first half of the Twentieth century, tried to

include unpaid houseworkin the national accounts and assess its value.11

In Sweden, Erick Lindahl, Einar Dahlgren and Karin kook estimated the value of unpaid

houseworkas 32% of Sweden’s GNP in 1929. In USA, Simon Kuznets from the National Bureau of

Economic Research declared that exclusion of the family labor from the National Income estimates

seriously limits the validity of these estimates, and that such estimates will not be sound unless the

data is improved or total disappearance of the family as a producer of goods.12

Kuznets estimated the

value of family production as 35% of the GDP in USA in1929 13

. In England 1958, Colin Clark

criticized the prevailing System of National Accounts emphasizing that the continued exclusion of

household production is untenable, and estimated the value of this production by about 27% of GDP

for England in 1956.14

The Most recent trial to integrate unpaid housework in the national accounts came within the

framework of in-depth analysis of the shortcomings of the current indicators, particularly GDP, for

measuring economic performance; the significant report prepared by three of the contemporary

10

A. C. Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Macmillan and Co. Limited, London, 1932 [1978], p. 32

11

See detailed presentation of these experiences in: Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory

About Everything: Domestic Labour in Neoclassical & Marxian Economics, Women's Economic Policy Analysis Unit,

Curtin University of Technology, August 2001, p. 8 - 11

12

Kuznets was awarded the Nobel Prize 1971 for his work in measuring national income. - Simon Kuznets, National

Income and its Composition, New York, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1941. p. 11 13

- Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 9 14

Collin Clark, "The Economics of Housework", Bulletin of the Oxford University Institute of Statistics, 1958, p. 205-

211

9

economic academicians known as the Stiglitz Commission Report 200815

The report emphasized

that it is due time to move from focus on economic production performance to measuring quality of

human life. It clarified that the level of the quality of life (or welfare) is determined by a group of

factors represented primarily in the material standard of living (income, consumption and wealth),

health, education, employment, political participation, social relations, and current and future

conditions of natural environment. Further, the report stressed that traditional measurements of

economic performance, particularly GDP, doesn’t take most of these factors into consideration.

Within the context of shifting focus towards quality of human life, the report provided an important

group of recommendations, most noted is the recommendation to extend the spectrum of national

income indicators to include non-market activities.

The report clarified that the staring point in this regard would be availing consistent information on

how people spend their time every day, that could allow comparisons among countries, and

throughout different time periods. It also called for providing comprehensive, independent, and

periodic accounts on the domestic activities16

On another level, the international feminist movement was heading the same way and calling

for developing methods of evaluating unpaid Housework and integrating it in subsidiary

complementary accounts to the national accounts. The demand was crystallized in the Beijing

Declaration of the Fourth World Women Conference 1995, which called upon governments and

academic and research institutions to conduct studies to evaluate women’s unpaid work and

disseminate the results as part of the mechanisms to address the phenomenon of feminization of

poverty17

Eventually, the process of developing national statistics lead the UN statistics’ commission to

acknowledge the need to prepare satellite accounts to the national accounts, specifically for the

unpaid housework statistics, and that such accounts should include the following data:18

15

This Commission was established upon the request of the French President Nicolas Sarkozy 2008 with the beginning

of the global financial crisis to identify shortcomings in the GDP as an indicator of economic performance and social

progress, and to clarify the additional information that might be required to produce more meaningful indicators of social

progress. The Commission included 25 economics professors from a number of esteemed universities and scientific

institutions, under the leadership of both Joseph Stiglitz and Amartya Sen Nobel Prize in Economics and Jean-Paul

Fitoussi. See: Report by the commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress,

www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr 16

Stiglitz Commission Report. IBID page 14 17

Summary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Minnesota advocates for Human Rights, January 1996,

p. 9& 20.

18

United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, Seminar on measuring the

contribution of women and men to the economy, New York , 28 February 2013.

10

Average hours spent on unpaid housework segregated by sex (setting apart, whenever

possible, domestic chores from child care activities)

Average number of hours spent on paid and unpaid labor (total labor burden) segregated by

sex

The statistics’ committee defined the unpaid labor as follows

- Housework activities

- Caring activities

- Community work/volunteering

Second: Unpaid housework in the economic capitalist thought

It can be argued that the main contribution of the national accounts pioneers, in highlighting the

monetary value of housework carried out mainly by women and emphasizing the need to integrate

domestic production in the economic analysis; came in a time when the capitalist economic thought

completely ignored housework. As long as this work is not considered productive, why should

economic thought and analysis be occupied with? And if women are economically are not

independent and depend on husbands to support them how, from an economic point of view, can we

talk about benefits gained by husbands, not to mention community, the wives’ housework. Thus,

until mid twentieth century, it was settled exclude housework from the circles of economic analysis

and thought. This lead to the Separation between two spheres; the “private sphere” related to

housework carried out by women, and the “public sphere” related to paid market work, and which

Alfred Marshal launched his term dependants to decide women’s position in the national statistics,

where he warned against increasing salaries of working women, because this might persuade them

to ignore their house duties19

, i.e. their natural work!

The credit for regaining interest in housework in the economic capitalist thought in the first

half of the twentieth century, goes to a pioneering group of women academics. Hazel Kirk, Margret

Reed and Elisabeth white’s academic research emphasized the importance of the time taken in the

household production and consumption. Their research criticized the mainstream economic thought

analysis of living levels being limited only to goods and services that Can be bought or sold in the

market20

19

Nancy Folbre, The Unproductive Housewife: Her Evolution in Nineteenth – Century Economic Thought, Journal of

Culture and society, The University of Chicago, 1991, p. 467

20

Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 13

11

The big step in integrating housework in the neoclassic economic theory was in the mid sixties

by the American economist Gray Stanley Beaker21

. Beaker published an article 1965, “A Theory of

the Allocation of Time”. He emphasized that the family resembles a small facility where capitalist

goods, raw materials and work are used to provide cleaning and food services and create useful

goods. This small facility doesn’t differ from market facilities except in only one aspect, the

working hours depends on family members choices and not to the monitoring of facility owner22

According to Becker, family members spend their time daily and the goods they get from the

market in varying activities and in different proportions, to produce goods that provide direct

satisfaction of their needs23

It could be said that Becker’s article clearly impacted the economic

thought and analysis throughout the seventies of the twentieth century. This lead Theodore Scultz24

to speak of the birth of a new economic branch, New Home Economics, which is occupied with

production, consumption, child rearing, human capital investment and time distribution between

house work and paid work.25

The best expression of the current Capitalist economic thought towards house work is Amartya

Sen’s works, Nobel prize winner in Economy. Sen emphasizes the importance of paid work in the

marker ass the way to support women’s liberation; stating that women’s ability to decide freely on

issues of reproduction and child rearing and changing the gender based division of labor; is linked to

their freedom to paid work outside the house. Having independent income enhances women’s social

status within the family and in society26

. Sen also stresses the difference between policies and

measures which aim to enhance welfare and quality of life for women, through elimination of

discrimination and achieving better life conditions, and those polices and measures which support

women’s agency. In the first, women are at the receiving end while the second kind of polices

makes women an active party seeking, by themselves, to achieve social and political changes that

would improve the lives of both women and men.

However, this automatic correlation between women’s work in the market and their liberation

and enhanced status in society was criticized by feminist economists. Marilyn Waring asserted that

the System of National Accounts is an essential tool for the masculine economy. She confirmed that

21

Gray Stanley Beaker won Noble Prize in Economics 1992 for his valuable contributions on family economy as a

branch of economic sciences 22

Gray S. Becker, "A Theory of the Allocation of Time", Economic Journal, 1965, p. 496 23

IBID, p. 495 24

American Economist, Nobel Prize winner in economics 1979 25

Theodore Scultz, "The Value of Children: An Economic Perspective" in Therese Jefferson & John King, Never

Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 16

26

Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom, New York, Anchor Books, 1999, p. 194

12

to measure the impact of increasing women’s work in the market on the economic welfare, there is a

need to take into consideration not only the increase in the total national production due to women’s

entering of the labor power, but also whether working women would continue carrying out house

work, or if the burden of such activities will be transferred to other individuals within the family27

This feminist approach might be the background of the Stiglitz commission’s recommendations

(2008) on reforming economic performance indicators. The recommendations stressed that it should

be taken into consideration the balance between working hour and rest hours, and that there is a

difference between getting specific standard of living by working 1500 hours, and getting the same

standard by working 2000 hours28

Third: Unpaid housework in the economic Marxists thought

The traditional viewpoint of the economic Marxists thought towards unpaid housework can be

summarized as follows: Housework embodies the first form of oppression in the history of humanity.

It is unproductive, even pathetic, idiotic and draining. The way to women’s liberation is their

involvement in the productive paid work in the market. The Capitalist system’s evolution should

ultimately lead to the disappearance of housework due to increasing commodification of many house

chores which will be provided through the market. In the Socialist system, women will be freed from

such activities as the state will be responsible for providing it.

By the end of the end of the nineteenth century, Engels wrote that the first form of oppression

in the history of humanity corresponded with the emergence of oppressive relation between men and

women through marriage; and that the first class oppression is men’s oppression of women. These

two types of oppression can only be overcome in the socialist society. As the means of production

are transferred to public ownership, the individual family will stop to be an economic unit in society,

and housework will be transformed from private business to community industry. Child care and

education will be public concerns.29

The socialist thinker, August Bible, emphasized that housework is a waste of time and an

expression of backwardness, and as such will inevitably disappear, a matter that is already

happening in capitalist states due to increasing Commodification of life. Most of the activities

27

- Marilyn Waring, If Women Counted: New Feminist Economics, Harper Collins Publishers, Paper pack Edition, 1990. 28

Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, OP. Cit. www.stiglitz-

sen-fitoussi.fr 29

Friedrich Engels, The Origin of the Family Private Property and the State, 1884, Moscow , Progress Publishes, 1972,

p. 76.

13

traditionally carried out by women could be acquired from the market at a lower price and a better

quality. Furthermore, houses are equipped with many electronic devices to get the housework done,

and thus the materialist conditions for women's emancipation have been created by the evolution of

capitalism itself. It will reach its goal with the achievement of socialism, and then the housework

will disappear at the end.30

At the Beginning of the Twentieth century, Rosa Luxembourg saw that paid female workers

enjoy economic independence and provide, similar to men, their community with productive work.

But women’s work in child rearing and house chores is not productive, though it helps men’s modest

salaries to cover family needs. As long as Capitalism and the system of paid work is prevailing,

then only work that provides surplus value is considered productive work. Luxembourg emphasized

that women’s political equality has to be rooted on solid economic grounds, i.e. their paid work. Paid

work, trade unions and socialist democracy had all lead to the advancement of working women away

from the stifling limited existence and pathetic idiotic tasks of running the house31

In the Soviet union, during the first half of the Twentieth century, housework was seen as the

main obstacle to women’s full emancipation. Vladimir Lenin wrote that despite all women’s

liberation laws, they continue to be house slaves, because the housework crushes, suffocates,

devaluates and ties them to the kitchen and nursery, and wastes their work on overwhelming,

drudgery and draining tasks32

It was natural that the 8th

Communist Party Conference, 1919, voted

for replacing housework with collective measures for housework services and child rearing.

However, many years passed by, without achieving these measures in reality. What happened in the

SU is that women were demanded to do two work shifts every day; one paid in the market, the other

unpaid at home.33

Looking down at the housework as nonproductive continued till the end of the fifties and

beginning of the sixties. In 1959, the Polish Marxist thinker, Oskar Lange wrote explaining the

difference between “natural economy” and the cash commodity economy. The first, including

housework, aims to fulfill the direct satisfaction of needs, while the second is a rational activity with

regards to both the aim or the tools of this activity.34

30

August Bebel, Woman under Socialism, 1879, Translated by Daniel de Leon, New York, Labor News Company, 1961,

p. 187

31

- Rosa Luxemburg, "Women's Suffrage and Class Struggle" in Dick Howard, Selected Political Writings of Rosa

Luxemburg, 1912, New York, Monthly Review Press, 1971, p. 216 - 221 32

Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 27

33 - IBIB.

34 Oscar Lange, Political Economy, Volume I; General Problems, New York, Macmillan, 1963.

14

Fourth: Feminist economic thought

Feminist literature in social sciences attracted attention to women’s housework. By the

seventies, it was settled that women’s housework represents an apparent real work. Main efforts in

this realm were focused on the injustice of the distribution of housework chores among men and

women.35

However, feminist economic thought was much developed further to provide a comprehensive

theory on women’s unpaid housework. This came mainly through the feminist Marxists as from the

seventies of the twentieth century, by Margaret Benston, Annette Cohen, Bonnie Fox, Roberta

Hamilton, Michelle Barrette and others.

In 1969, Margaret Benston, building on traditional Marxist thought, emphasized that the roots

for women’s second class status is in fact economic, and that women are different than men in their

relation to means of production. In reality, housework belongs to “pre-Capitalism” since it is about

the production of simple usable values, and not salable “commodities”. Benston saw that women

work outside the monetary economy, and their work has no value, and hence it’s not real work, but

more of slaves and villagers work. Benston specified two requirements for women’s emancipation to

be realized: the first is equal opportunity with men to work outside the house; the second is to

transform the housework into work that belongs to public sphere through assuming social

responsibility for child care, providing collective places for food, and collective washers. She

pointed out that the availability of these two conditions could not be imagined under Capitalism; on

one hand, women’s unpaid housework was not as profitable to be an incentive for the production

tools’ owners to invest in that field; on the other hand, the capitalist economy was not capable of

rapid expansion enough to provide jobs for all women. Unlike traditional Marxist thoughts, Benston

felt that women housework will not eventually disappear under capitalism.

As from the seventies of the twentieth century, a gradual elaboration of a Marxists feminist

theory on housework was on the making. Its main aspects were:

a) Housework is a productive work

35

Christine Delphy, Close to Home: A Materialist Analysis of Women's Oppression, University of Massachusetts, 1984,

p. 16

15

Feminist Economic thought saw views of earlier Marxists on housework as unproductive work,

were reflecting male bias in the mainstream Marxist thinking. Housework just like paid work in

the capitalist system result is production of an added value, and so it has to be paid for.

Housework could be seen as “indirectly” productive, since it provides necessary inputs for

production and reproduction of an essential capitalist commodity, i.e. human labor. The goods

men buy with their wages need further work to be transformed to usable food, clothes and

housing. This work is done by women, and it contributes in the reproduction of the labor power

needed for the capitalist class.36

Feminist economic thought paid special attention to the middle class women’s role in

contribution to child education. The schooling system presumes the presence of parents’ helping

their children to study at home. Mothers are the ones who take on this task. Businessmen benefit

directly from this work as it impacts the induction of the labor power they utilize afterwards. 37

b) Value Law applies to housework

The value law simply points out to the producers’ strong inclination to adopt the most efficient

production methods (low cost) under the pressure of competition and the fear of being kicked out

of the market. The question that keeps posing regarding housework; is how to apply the law of

value to it since the married women's products do not enter the market to begin with. If the

housewife herself is the one who manages and organizes her housework, can issues such as the

profit motive or the fear of competitive pressures be considered at all?

The Feminist economic thought response was that the commodities and services provided by

housework resembles, or nearly resembles, commodities and services in the market. Since

women (and men) are faced with financial limitations requiring the efficiency of housework as is

the case with production for the market, it means that the value law applies too to housework.38

c) Housework produces value, and women are being exploited

Feminist economic literature tried to explain the differentiation between men and women

regarding housework. It used both capitalist and patriarchal theories. They pointed out that men

36

Wally Seccombe, The Housewife and Her Labour under Capitalism, New Left Review, 1974, No. 83, p. 3- 24 37

Loree A. Primeau, A Woman's Place: Unpaid work in the Home, The American Journal of Occupational Therapy,

November 1992, p. 984

38

Wally Seccombe, Reflections on the Domestic Labour Debate and Prospects for Marxist-Feminist Synthesis, 1986, p.

200

16

as a capitalist class and as husbands are the ones who receive the surplus value resulting from

women’s unpaid housework. The capitalist class become able to pay law wages for male workers

because of the role women play in providing meals, cleaning services, washing, child rearing for

free to men. Without these free services, men would have asked for higher wages, and thus

capitalist would bear higher cost.

Men as husbands get the surplus value of women’s work as they enjoy a higher standard of living

compared to what they would get if their wives were fairly paid for their housework. Men,

through the marriage institution limit women’s ability to enter the paid work market, which

emphasizes women’s economic dependency to men.39

d) The Dynamic relation between housework and Capitalism

Marxist feminist economic literature points out to the dynamic relation between women’s

housework and capitalism. One the one hand women’s unpaid work leads to devaluation of

men’s working power (as long as the free or very low cost products are provided by women’s

work), and enhances the profits of the capitalist class’s and hence it justifies the continuation of

such free housework.

On the other side, some literature said that women are not exposed to the same degree of

exploitation as those working for salary. Besieged by the exhausting housework, they provide low

quality services and goods which could be provided more efficiently through the market.

Therefore, the capitalist class tries to commodify housework to enable higher rates of exploitation

in this domain.40

. It might be the basis to which the Traditional Marxist thought built its

assumption that capitalism will tend to commodify housework soon.

However, Marxist feminist economic thought didn’t escape criticism; the main criticism

came from the British professor of social economy, Catherin Hakim, who founded the “preference

theory”. According to her theory, men and women have varied choices for life styles. In advanced

societies women’s preferences represent an essential determinant for their life choices, in particular

the choice between focusing on activities related to children and family life, or focusing on career

and competitive activities in public sphere.

39

Heidi Hartmann, the Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: Towards a More progressive Union. In Loree A.

Primeau, A Woman's Place, OP. Cit., 984 40

Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory About Everything, OP. Cit., p. 35

17

Catherine Hakim 41

asserts, based on evidence from field research in the last three decades of

twentieth century in industrial developed countries particularly USA and England, that when women

have open choices. A minority of women focus their choices on paid work, while the majority try to

achieve balance between work and care for the family requirements. The prominent example is

women moving to part-time jobs or changing career or even stopping to work altogether. The

category of women whose choices are focused on the family is also a minority, best examples are

those who give priority to the family and stop working after marriage, unless the and family suffers

financial distress.

On another vein, Hakim stresses that choice of the majority of men are focused on career,

followed by balancing work and family care requirements. Only a few minority of men focus their

choices on family.

Hence, Hakim’s prophecy that despite the increasing numbers of women flowing to the work

market, only few of them will chose to focus on work, and that the majority of women will prefer

achieving balance between paid work and housework to care for the family.

41

- Cathrine Hakim, Women, careers and work – life preferences, British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, August

2006, p. 287-291

18

Chapter 2

International Experiences to Estimate the Value of Un-paid

Housework

UN data points out that many of the world countries became interested in measuring and

estimation of unpaid work as part of its official statistics. 48% of 126 countries included in the

gender statistics program are regularly conducting time-use surveys, which show the citizens’ daily

hours distribution between paid and unpaid work, personal care and leisure. 42% of countries do

measure unpaid work, but only 7% of countries were committed to integrate unpaid work statistics in

Satellite Accounts to the System of National accounts to complete the real picture of economic

development and social progress.42

It interesting that the last group of countries is not limited to

developed countries but includes also some developing countries, e.g. Mexico which assessed

women’s contribution to both paid and unpaid work and included the results in official Satellite

Accounts in 2011. Colombia became 2012 the first country to commit to include care activities to

children, elder and sick people in the National Economy.43

Notably, despite the increasing interest in time use surveys to measure the number of unpaid

work hours, yet, commitment to estimate the value of such work and register it in satellite accounts

is still limited to few states. However, the mere availability of such surveys and its periodic

implementation provides research institutions with basic data that can be used to estimate the value

of unpaid work and its proportion to GDP in different countries44

According to UN, gender statistics for world countries in 2012 show that women spend

longer time in unpaid housework compared to men. The gap is greater in developing countries

compared to developed countries. More important, taking housework hours into consideration

women’s total daily working hours are frequently more than those of men, to a degree that women’s

housework hours could be considered a second work shift45.

42

- United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, Seminar on measuring the

contribution of women and men to the economy, 28 February 2013, New York. 43

- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, "Equal sharing of responsibilities

between men and women, including care giving in the context HIV/AIDS", 12 March 2013 44

UN reports that 34 countries (developed and developing) conducted time use surveys between 2009-2012 . Albania,

Algeria, Australia, Belgium, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Djibouti, Estonia,

Ethiopia, Finland, France, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Ireland, Japan, Macedonia, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, New

Zealand, Norway, Romania, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States. See United Nations, ibid., P

6

45

- United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, OP.Cit.

19

First: Measuring Unpaid Housework Hours

Indicators of measuring women’s unpaid working hours can be specified for each country are based

on OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) Family Database, 46

. This

database has data from 23 countries from developed industrialized countries and Eastern Europe, in

addition to Mexico and Turkey. The database provides an analysis to the use of daily hours in these

countries during the period 1999 – 2008. Daily hours are distributed between paid work, unpaid

work, personal care (including sleep and eating, etc) and leisure, specifying the differential

percentage for each of these domains of the total daily hours. Comparative indicators for men and

women are displayed in table (1).

The main indicators are:

1- Time spent on paid work

Time Spent on paid work represents around 21% on average of the total daily hours for men in

the core47

OECD countries, compared to 12.2% for women.

Data in table (1) confirms that the gap between men and women increases more in developing

countries compared to developed industrialized countries. Men’s share ranges between 30% of

the total daily hours in Mexico to 16% in Belgium. As for women the percentage ranges between

17% in Japan, Latvia and Lithuania and only 6% in Turkey.

2- Time spent on unpaid work

The concept of unpaid work in the OECD database includes both housework and care for the

elderly and children, in addition to voluntary for the community. Table (1) shows that the

average of women’s unpaid work in the core OECD countries is 20.4% of the total daily hours,

i.e. more than double for men 9.8%.

Here too, there is huge disparity among different countries. However, this time it is not just

reflecting the different economic levels, but also seems to be reflecting the socio-cultural

traditions. In Turkey, Mexico and Korea, time spent by women on unpaid work is nearly four

46

- OECD Family Database, "Time use for work, care, and other day-to-day activities", OECD – Social Policy Division

– Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social affairs.

www.oecd.org/social/family/database 47

Originally, in 1964, OECD was formed of 18 European countries in addition to USA and Canada. OECD gradually

expanded, particularly with the inclusion of Eastern European countries. The core OECD countries are: Austria,

Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain,

Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, England, Ireland, USA, Canada. See www.oecd.org

20

folds of that of men, and three folds in Japan, Poland and Italy. The gap decrease to be only1.5

folds in Sweden, Norway and Finland.

3- Total time spent on paid and unpaid work

Women in the OECD core countries spend, on average, more total working hours daily 32.6%

hours compared to men 30.8%. The table also reflects the impact of economic, social and cultural

factories on both the total work burden on women in those countries of the or the disparity of this

burden between women and men. While women’s total working hours/day amount to around

43% and 39% in Mexico and Lithuania; this percentage is only 28.1 in Belgium and around 29%

in Germany and Norway.

On another level, the discrepancy between men and women regarding the total work load burden

gets higher in the less developed countries as in Mexico, Turkey and Eastern European countries,

while the gap decreases in more developed countries, except for Italy and Canada. The gap

almost disappears in Sweden New Zealand, Germany, Australia and Japan whether due to

substantive participation of men in house chores, because women spend more housework hours

while men spend more work hours in the market.

In conclusion, women on average spend more working hours equal to or higher than men;

however the greater part of men’s work is paid work, while greater part of women’s work is

unpaid work.

21

Table (1)

Average of differential total time spent on work for men and women

In 23 OECD countries 1999 - 2008

Men women State

Total Unpaid

work

Paid

work

Total Unpaid

work

Paid

work

38.0 8.0 30.0 43.2 31.1 12.1 Mexico

33.6 6.2 27.4 34.1 19.7 14.4 Japan

30.8 4.3 26.5 32.8 16.1 16.7 Korea

34.2 10.0 24.2 36.3 19.1 17.2 Latvia

33.7 11.3 22.4 39.0 12.1 16.9 Lithuania

29.4 7.7 21.7 38.2 22.1 16.1 Poland

32.9 11.4 21.5 38.2 17.9 15.1 Canada

34.3 13.3 21.0 37.6 22.8 14.8 Estonia

28.2 7.4 20.8 34.3 24.4 9.9 Italy

33.0 12.7 20.3 33.6 22.5 11.1 Australia

26.3 6.1 20.2 31.8 25.7 6.1 Turkey

31.4 11.2 20.2 32.3 18.2 14.1 USA

31.2 11.1 20.1 32.1 20.2 11.9 UK

31.9 11.8 20.1 31.8 17.0 14.8 Sweden

32.3 12.4 19.9 32.2 20.7 11.5 New Zealand

30.8 11.1 19.7 29.8 16.4 13.4 Norway

31.7 12.2 19.5 33.9 22.4 11.5 Spain

31.9 13.0 18.9 36.1 22.3 13.8 Slovenia

28.9 10.2 18.7 30.8 19.2 11.6 France

29.1 11.0 18.1 30.3 17.5 12.8 Finland

28.6 11.2 17.4 28.9 18.9 10.0 Germany

29.4 12.9 16.5 35.1 22.7 12.4 Bulgaria

26.3 10.7 15.6 28.1 18.0 10.1 Belgium

30.8 9.8 21.0 32.6 20.4 12.2 Core 18 OECD countries

This table has been compiled by the researcher from the OECD Family database.

OECD Family Database: "Time use for work, care, and other day-to-day activities", OECD –

Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social affairs.

www.oecd.org/social/family/database

22

23

Second: monetary estimation of Unpaid housework

Due to the divergence among world’s countries official efforts in terms of monetary valuation

of unpaid work and its percentage of GDP, as well as the different valuation methods; it is difficult to

compare countries. We will use the OECD study on valuation of the monetary value of unpaid work

in 25 of its member countries. The study covered the age category 15-64 during 1998-2009, and was

published 2010.48

The study calculated the average number of unpaid working hours in each country and

estimated its monetary value according to the payment/hour in the specific country. It used two

alternatives in this regard49

. The first, is the average payment/hour at the national level, as an

expression of the wage for alternative work chance where this time could have been spent. The

second, is the average payment/hour in the informal sector, considered as the minimum wage usually

paid for housework services, i.e. wage of non specialized (generalist), which covers most of the types

of housework. Table (2) provides the country level estimations.

Table (2) points out that using the alternative opportunity, unpaid work ranged between 38%

and 75% of GDP in Hungary and UK respectively. Using the minimum wage in the informal sector;

unpaid work ranged between 19% and 53% of GDP in Korea and Portugal respectively.

The study show that by using the simple average of both estimation methods, we reach a

conclusion that the value of unpaid work represents a percentage that ranges between 33% and 50%

of the GDP in the 25 OECD countries included in the study. Certainly, this is a huge percentage

impacting the people’s standard of living in those countries, yet it is not included in its National

Accounts.

It is worth noting that although the study affirmed the conclusions of similar studies and

surveys, i.e. that women spend longer hours than men in unpaid work, yet the study, when

evaluating this unpaid work, didn’t look into the shares of both women and men and the percentage

of each of their contributions in the GDP.

48

- OECD, Cooking, "Caring and Volunteering: Unpaid Work Around The World", OECD Social, Employment and

Migration Working Papers, No. 116, 2010. 49

Different recognized alternatives for assessment of unpaid work will be addressed in details later when explaining the

methodology used for Egypt.

24

Table (2)

Measuring the value of unpaid work in OCD Countries as a percentage of GDP

1998 - 2009

According generalist

market replacement

cost

%

According to

opportunity cost

%

State

19 45 Korea

20 44 Canada

21 48 Norway

22 40 Poland

24 42 Mexico

24 55 USA

24 51 Netherland

26 50 Estonia

28 44 Belgium

30 59 Sweden

31 48 Austria

31 55 Germany

32 56 Finland

32 53 Ireland

34 75 UK

34 57 France

36 52 Italy

36 38 Hungary

38 39 Slovenia

38 62 Denmark

40 54 Spain

41 58 Japan

42 60 New Zealand

45 60 Australia

53 61 Portugal

Source:

OECD, Cooking, "Caring and Volunteering: Unpaid Work around the World", OECD Social,

Employment and Migration Working Papers, Paper No. 116, 2010, P. 29& 30.

25

In addition to comparative studies to estimate unpaid working hours and its value within the

OECD, one of the interesting studies sponsored by the UN and published 2012, is the study of

unpaid work in China50

. Study results confirmed conclusions of similar studies in the west. It

clearly showed that unpaid work consumes nearly 47.1% of women’s daily hours, compared to 20.

2% of men’s daily hours. It also indicated that the Chinese women’s average total work hours (paid

and unpaid) is 58 hours/week compared to only 52.6 for men.

The study estimated the value of unpaid work as ranging between 29.4% - 31.3% of GDP.

Once again, this estimation was not differentiated according to sex to value women’s total

contribution in the economic activity and its impact on the community’s standard of living.

Third: Measuring and valuation of Unpaid housework in Egypt

Despite the wealth of studies on Egyptian women in the Labor market; at the level of

economic analysis, there is immense rarity of studies which address measuring and valuation of

housework within the family. This, in part, is due to the limited and recent availability of specific

data on time use. The study published by the Economic Research Forum (ERF), “Rethinking Time

Allocation of Egyptian Women”, is probably the first one published on the subject 2010.

The study 51

, focused on measuring the hours women spend on housework, and the impact of

marriage and having children on increasing this type of work and decreasing the time available for

paid work. According to the study, the average number of housework hours/week for women are

20.8 hours for unmarried women with no children, compared to 32.5 hours for married women with

no children and 51.7 hours for married women with children52

. . the study didn’t compare the burden

of housework for both men and women since the data on time use where only limited to women and

children at that time. As for the valuation of the monetary value for unpaid housework, its

percentage to the GDP or estimation of the total contribution of women to the economic activity in

Egypt, there are no previous studies to our knowledge.

50

- UNRISD, United Nations Institute for Social Development, "Gender Pattern and Value of Unpaid Work" – findings

for China's first large scale Time Use Survey, October 2012. 51

- Rana Hendy, Rethinking Time Allocation of Egyptian Women: A Matching Analysis, Economic Research Forum,

Working Paper No. 256, 2010. 52

- Rana Hendy, IBID, p. 18

26

Fourth: Main Impact of Measuring and Estimation of Women’s Unpaid

Housework

Results of measuring and estimation of unpaid housework in different world of countries

clarified the great contribution of unpaid work towards the community welfare, and that women are

carrying the bigger burden of such work. Time use surveys showed the higher total working hours

for women compared with men, and consequently the lower rest and leisure hours they get. This

enabled feminist movements in different world countries to demand the right to a balanced life

responsibilities/work ad that such responsibilities should be redistributed among men and women in

the family. Further, such results supported demands for equal pay, particularly that one of the

traditional arguments usually raised to prefer that women should be the ones who take maternity

leaves, or even leave their work totally, is that women usually receive less wages.53

and consequently

it is better for the family that the man continues working because he provides a bigger wage.

Taking into consideration that child rearing represents a public service and human investment

for the whole community, not only the family, women’s demands received some responses. The

responses varied in its degree and extent from one community to another, whether at the level of

redistribution of child care responsibilities among men and women, or the stat interventions to carry

some of these burdens, as well as creating “family friendly” work environment. Some improvements

were also achieved on the way to “equal pay for equal work” for men and women. The trend to

acknowledge the right of women to share the wealth accumulated during marriage based on

considering it as the result of joint effort of which the housework is part. Following is a brief

account of the main steps achieved in these domains in different countries of the world:

1- Redistribution of housework responsibilities in the family:

we can say that the main focus in this domain was focused on changing laws and regulations

related to child care leave, to increase the involvement of men in child care and reform and

house work in general.

Some countries provide a paid short “paternity leave” for fathers when a child is born (3-4 days),

as the case of Greece, Korea and Netherland . However, in some countries the “paternity leave”

is a long one, 20 weeks, as in the case of Portugal where the father receives 51% of the wage54.

53

- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, "Equal sharing of responsibilities

between men and women, including care giving in the context HIV/AIDS", 12 March, 20013, p. 3 54

- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labour and Social Affairs,

"Key Characteristics of Parental Leave Systems, May 2014, p. 2

27

In addition to the maternity leave, many countries allow the father, the mother or both to get a

child care leave (full or part-time). Payment for such leave is for the family as a whole, and thus

is paid for only one of the parents. In most OECD countries, parents are allowed to decide who

of them will take the leave, as well as the possibility for exchanging between themselves. Some

third world countries are beginning to adopt such measures; Chile, since 2011, had allowed

mother to transform a percentage between 50 – 66% of child care leave to the father 55

.

In order to ensure that women are not the only ones who carry this burden, some countries

specify a quota of the child car leave for fathers that can’t be transformed to mothers, so if it is

not used by the father the family loses it. This quota is 3 months in Iceland56

. In 2002 Sweden

extended the Child care leave to 480 days; of which 60 days are allocated for each parent and

cannot be transformed, and in 2008, they created the “Gender Equality Bonus”, a financial

award, given to families when both parents use the child care leave beyond each one’s quota.

The maximum amount of the bonus is given to parents who equally share the leave57.

2- Reforming Laws on wages and Pension for women and Child care allowance

Improving the wages’ situation for women require two things: first, eliminating biased forms of

discrimination in wages and second, raising minimum wages. Jobs receiving minimum salaries

in most of the world, particularly domestic services, are frequently taken by women.58

Some countries provide important examples for enhancing wages situation; Brazil gradually

increased minimum wages, Zambia and Chile adopted LO recommendations on domestic

servants and specified minimum wages 59

and Sweden issued a nondiscrimination act (2009)

which had binding measures to ensure equal pay for men and women in all facilities that have 25

workers or more 60

.

Also, some countries increased maternity leave e.g. Netherland, where the leave was doubled

from 13 to 26 weeks61

. . Other countries provided compensatory benefits within the pension to

compensate parents for unpaid periods incurred for child care as in the case of France62

.

55

- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, OP. Cit, p. 3 56

OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labour and Social Affairs,

IBID, p. 2 57

- Statistics Sweden, Women and Men in Sweden - Facts and Figures 2010, p. 41 58

Gender statistics in Sweden show that women represented 87% of workers in housework and personal services in

2008; and that these jobs received the lowest wage among different jobs on the salary scale average. It also showed that

women even in housework services received slightly less wages compared to men. See: Statistics Sweden, OP.Cit, p. 67

59

- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, OP. Cit, p. 4 60

- ILO, Global Employment Trends for Women 2012, p. 42 61

- UN commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, OP. Cit, p. 4 62

- UN commission on The Status of Women, IBID, p. 4

28

3- Community pre-school Child care:

Some countries tried to consolidate community involvement in carrying some of the burden of pre-

school child care, a matter that helps to ease women’s burden of housework and gives them a greater

opportunity to join the labor market. Table (3) shows the main forms of community participation.

a) Care provided for children under 4 in certified nurseries’:

This service is provided by the government in many countries of the world. Parents pay a

fee for the service, which is usually deducted from taxes of the family, or be reimbursed

later through governmental cash subsidy, or others means to ensure governmental bearing

the costs of such care. Examples include many advanced industrial countries such as

Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France and Germany, and also some third world countries as

Mexico and Chile, who focused such service on poor families63 In Mexico Governmental

nurseries provide free care for children of working women, for families whose income is

less than the minimum wage. In Chile, 2009, the government launched a program to

establish 3500 Child care free centers for families in the category of the 40% least income

population.

b) Day Care for children at home:

In case of unavailability of enough places in the formal nurseries or if the parents wish that

the child is raised in a “domestic environment”, child care services are provided by

specialized person at their homes, or at the children homes, but the number of children

should not exceed 3-4 children. Despite what may come to mind that such services are

usually provided by the private sector, in many countries in the world offer such services

are provided by the government. Table (3)

c) Kinder gardens

Except for Japan, all developed industrialized countries are keen that their government

play the leading role in the provision of care services in kinder gardens whether full-day or

part-time. kinder gardens prepare children for formal schooling through integrating

educational programs by 50%, and are supervised by professional educators.

63

- UN commission on The Status of Women, IBID, p. 4

29

Table (3)

Community responsibility for Pre-school Child Care in OECD Countries

Kinder gardens In the family Nurseries State

Public Private Private Australia

Public Public/private Private Austria

Public Public/private Public Belgium

Public Private Private Canada

Public Public Public Cyprus

Public Public/private Private Czech Republic

Public Public Public Denmark

Public Public Public Finland

Public Public Public France

Public Public Public Estonia

Public Public Public Germany

Public Public Public Greece

Public Public Public Hungary

Public Public Public Iceland

Public Public/private Private Ireland

Public Public Public Italy

private Private Private Japan

Public/private Public/private Public Korea

Public Public Public Luxemburg

Public Public Public Malta

Public Public Public Mexico

Public Public/private Private Netherland

Public/private Private Private New Zealand

Public Public Public Norway

Public Public/private Private Poland

Public Public/private Private Portugal

Public Public Public Slovenia

Public Public Public Spain

Public Public Public Sweden

Public Public/private Private Switzerland

Public Public/private Private Turkey

Public Public/private Private England

Public Private USA

Source:

OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labour and

Social Affairs, Typology of Children and Early Education Services, December 2010, p.

30

4- Child Care beyond schools hours:

Providing such services is one of the ways by which some governments support working parents to

achieve balance between work and life. it is still in its early stages. It covers mainly pupils in

primary schools, and in few case preparatory schools. Italy is almost the only case where students in

secondary schools are also covered by such services. Table (4)

As clear from table (4), services provided to pupils include activities before or after schooling hours.

It may also be extended frequently to include activities during the holidays, as the case in Austria,

Canada, Denmark, Hungary, Malta, Korea, New Zealand, Portugal, Slovenia, Romania, and UK.

Table (4)

Main Systems for Child Care outside Schooling Hours in OECD Countries

Activity Child

Age

State

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 3-11 Austria

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 0-6 Belgium

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 5-9 Canada

Activities after schooling hours 3-12 Cyprus

Activities after schooling hours 3-14 Chic

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 6-11 Denmark

Activities after schooling hours 6-11 Estonia

Activities before and after schooling hours 7-11 Finland

Activities before and after schooling hours 3-11 France

Activities before and after schooling hours 5-11 Germany

Activities before and after schooling hours 5-11 Greece

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 6-11 Hungary

Activities after schooling hours 6-17 Italy

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 3-11 Malta

Activities during holidays 6-11 Japan

Activity package after schooling hours and in holidays 6-11 Korea

Activities before and after schooling hours 4-12 Netherland

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 5-11 New Zealand

None Available 3-11 Poland

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 3-11 Portugal

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 3-11 Romania

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 6-14 Slovenia

Activities mainly before schooling hours 3-11 Spain

Activities before and after schooling hours 6-11 Sweden

Activity package before and after schooling hours and in holidays 0-14 UK

Source;

OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labour and

Social Affairs, Out – of – school – hours Care Services, p. 3

31

5- Sharing Wealth between couples when Separated:

The principle of sharing wealth between couples was established in the twentieth of the last

century in both Soviet Union and Scandinavian countries64

. The goal at that time was to protect

the weaker party in the marriage institution, i.e. the wife, where the mainstream thinking was that

mean are the bread winners and the women are economically dependants. However, it became

more settled with the increasing number of women entering the labor market, the increasing

tendency of economic thought to acknowledge the importance of domestic work and its impact

on the family welfare, and with the escalating demands of the feminist movements to take such

work into consideration and measuring and publicizing its value and contribution to GDP. Now,

the principle guiding the laws of countries which approved the sharing of wealth by the divorced

couples is that such wealth is the result of the joint work of both couples of which the domestic

work represents an essential part.

It is noted that the increasing trend to enact the wealth sharing principle takes different forms in

different countries, that could be summarized as follows:

a) Division of Wealth between Spouses in Europe

|Separate Property system

UK is the famous example for this system, where each spouse has his/her independent

property during marriage, and the court is to decide how to share these properties in case of

divorce.. The law had specified the basis on which the court should apply. These include

“each party’s contribution to the family welfare, including housework and care for the

family”. Despite the fact that it is up to the court to decide the percentage each party should

have, yet the main trend is 50% for each party. In a ruling 2001, the judge confirmed that

“the property should always be equally unless, and only within limits, there is a good reason.”

This was further confirmed by a famous ruling 2002 “it is unacceptable to specify a greater

value for the bread winner contribution compared to the home maker”65

.

Deferred Community of Property system

The famous examples of applying that system were in Norway, Denmark, Sweden,

Germany, Austria and Greece. Despite the specificity of the national laws applied in each

country in this regard, yet they all share a common feature: the separation of spousal

64

- EJCL, Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, Matrimonial Property in Europe – A Link between Sociology and

Family Law, Vol. 12, December 2008, p. 2

www.ejcl.org 65

- EJCL, Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, Matrimonial Property in Europe, OP. cit., p. 3

32

property during marriage, and the division of wealth equally between them when they

divorce. Some exceptions to the principle of parity include exclusion of what one of the

spouses gets through inheritance, donation, the practice of his/her profession, and in case

of short-term marriage.

In Norway, for example, the marriage Act provisions issued in 1991 recognizes the

spouses' shared ownership of the house purchased during marriage, on the basis that

there is an indirect contribution of the wife in financing the property through her

provided child care and housework, and/or her contribution to family expenses. Such

contribution establishes her right, even if the husband had bought the house with his own

money66.

In Germany, at divorce both spouses provide a list of the increase of her/his property and

wealth and this increase is divided equally between them67.

And in Greece, both spouses had the right at divorce to claim division of profits of the

other party’s property which s/he thinks that s/he had contributed to it. The law takes into

consideration all direct and indirect contributions including: housework, professional

help, psychological support, creating conducive family environment, providing ideas and

improving social relations that positively impacts the other spouse and enhances her/his

professional work. The law assumes that each spouse’s contribution, to begin with, is at

least one third of the other party’s profits and gains68.

Limited Community of Property

France, Italy, Spain and Croatia present famous examples of the system based on shared

spouses’ ownership of the wealth during the marriage, and its equal division at divorce.

France applies the principle of shared property on the couple together, and at divorce,

the court has the authority of dividing the shared property in a way that provides for

equal standard of living for both parties. The law allows the conversion of real estate

property from one spouse to the other as a form of compensation69 .

In Italy, the law stipulates the joint ownership of the spouses of all transferable or

otherwise property of the family during marriage, regardless of whether they have been

66

- IBID, p. 4 67

- IBID, p. 5 68

- IBID, p. 6 69

- IBID, p. 6

33

purchased jointly or individually. However, the law excludes property, which any of the

spouses gets through inheritance, donation, the practice of his/her profession. At divorce

the joint ownership ends and each party has the right to 50% of the family's assets.

In Spain, the law stipulates the joint ownership of the couple. At divorce financial

compensation is to be provided to the party, who was responsible housework or worked

for the other party without pay or for low pay70.

In Croatia the Family Law (2003) stipulates shared property of all property and its

income gained by any of the spouses through work during marriage. The law stipulates

that the intended “work” can be individual or joint, direct or indirect, and that indirect

work includes child care and housework and moral support. At divorce, wealth is divided

equally between the spouses unless they have agreed otherwise.

Universal Community of Property

Netherlands is the only country applying this system. The system considers that the

shared property of the spouses during the marriage includes all assets acquired prior to

and during marriage, except what any of the spouses gets through will, inheritance or

social insurance pension. Unless there is a prior otherwise agreement each spouse has the

right to an equal share of the common wealth at the end of the marriage71.

b) Dividing wealth between Spouses in Canada

Each states in Canada has its own law with regards to sharing wealth between spouses.

These laws are based on the assumption that property debts of any of the spouses during

marriage should be shared equally72.

c) Dividing wealth between Spouses in South Africa

According to law 88/1984 on the ownership of matrimonial wealth and its amendments,

spouses can agree that upon divorce, the party whose wealth had not increased or minimally

increased during marriage, has the right to claim 50% of the difference in the increase

between the two wealth73

.

70

- IBID, p. 7 71

- IBID, p. 8 72

- Family Justice Service, Matrimonial Property – General Information, Alberta, Canada

www.albertacourts.ab.ca/fjs/selfhelp/FJS_Property_married_12.pdf 73

- Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984 , Judicial Matters amendment Act 66 of 2008.

www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/1984-008.pdf

34

d) Dividing wealth between Spouses in Malaysia:

In Malaysia there are two laws; one for non-Muslims and one for Muslims. However, studies

shows that the difference is mainly about terminology and not the content and nature of the

legal texts. (e.g. using the Arabic word Talak to refer to divorce)74

.

According to both laws, upon divorce, the court has the authority, to divide the assets the

spouses get during marriage through any of the spouses’ individual efforts, or to sell these

assets and divide its revenue between the two parties. The court takes into consideration

contributions of the other party who didn’t have asset to the family welfare through caring for

the house and the family. T court is free to chose the type of division, but in all cases the

party who owns the asset gets a bigger share.

e) Dividing wealth between Spouses in Morocco and Tunisia:

The sharing of matrimonial wealth in both countries is based on the principle of independent

individual financial responsibility but allowing the spouses to make an agreement regarding

the division of matrimonial wealth. In 1998, Tunisia passed an Act which acknowledged the

joint ownership of wealth, provided prior agreement of the spouses within the marriage

contract, or under a separate agreement. At divorce, the common property is specified and

divided between the spouses.75

In Morocco, the family Code (2004) provides for the

independence of financial responsibility for each of the spouses. The division of matrimonial

wealth requires a , are not sharing their wealth after divorce except under certified agreement

between them independently of the marriage contract.76

74

- Dr. Norliah Ibrahim et al., The Wrights of the Wife to Claim on a division of Matrimonial Property after Dissolution

of Marriage: Malaysian perspective, Faculty of Law, International Islamic University of Malaysia.

www.childjustice.org/index.php/component/edocoman/?task=document.viewdoc&id=226&Itemid=468 75

Law 94/1998 (dated 9 November 1998) concerning shared property between spouses

www.e-justice.tn/fileadmin/fichiers_site_arabe/droits_homme/legisl_nat/femmes/L_1988_94.pdf 76

The Mudowana Al Ausrah (family Code) 703/2004

www.ugtm.ma/siteugtm/pdf/codefamille_ar.pdf

35

Chapter 3

Methodology of Measuring and Estimation

of Egyptian Women’s Unpaid Housework

The starting point to measure and assess the value of unpaid housework for any community is to

calculate the hours spent on such work, then provide monetary estimates according to wage/hours

for similar work in the market. Counting housework hours is based on the data from time use

surveys prepared by the official statistics bodies to calculate the average daily (and annually)

housework hours. This would then be applied to the number of population (men/women) in the

working age category. Following is an explanation of how this applies to the Egyptian case.

First, the concept of unpaid housework

According to the UN statistics committee unpaid work includes:

Housework

Caring

Community work and volunteering

As we notice, this concept is adopted by all studies and statistics which measure and assess unpaid

housework, whether in advanced industrialized countries or some of the Third World countries

headed by China77

However, time surveys’ data in Egypt does not address activities related to

community or social activities. hence, and due to the lack of necessary data on such activities, the

concept of unpaid domestic work in this study is limited to domestic and care services.

On the other hand, SNA’s concept of unpaid housework excludes any economic activities that are

practiced at home for the purposes of the market (paid clothes’ sewing, preparing meals for sale,

77

see System of National Accounts 2008, the introduction of the Arabic version, and Ministry of Planning website

www.mop.gov.eg

- United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, Seminar on measuring the

contribution of women and men to the economy, 28 February 2013, New York.

- OECD, what is household\s Non – Market Production worth?, OECD economic Studies No. 18, spring 1992.

- OECD, Cooking, "Caring and Volunteering: Unpaid Work Around The World", OECD Social, Employment and

Migration Working Papers, No. 116, 2010.

- Malika Hamdad, Valuing Households' Unpaid Work in Canada, 1992 and 1998: Trends and Sources of Change,

Statistics Canada, May 2003

- Statistics Sweden, Men and Women in Sweden: Facts and Figures 2010.

- UNRISD, United Nations Institute for Social Development, "Gender Pattern and Value of Unpaid Work" – findings for

China's first large scale Time Use Survey, October 2012.

36

family enterprises, breeding animals and poultry to sell in the market ... etc.). It also excludes any

portion of the agricultural and livestock production intended for sale in the market that is kept for

direct consumption in the family (the subsistence economy).

Accordingly, we have specified the main groups of housework forms within the scope of this study

as follows:

- Preparing food and drinks

- Cleaning, organizing and care for the home

- Washing dishes

- Washing and care for clothes (ironing, sewing, mending)

- Caring for plants and the garden

- Fetching water

- Fetching and/or preparation of fuel

- Breeding poultry for family use

- Preparing butter and cheese for family use

- House maintenance

- Cleaning, maintenance and repair of durable goods for the family

- Purchase of family and house supplies

- Care for elderly and sick family members

- Child care

Second, the time use data in Egypt

Time use data in different countries are collected by the official statistics’ bodies through periodic

surveys. In Egypt these data were first available in 1998, through the Egyptian Labor Market Panel

Survey (LEMPS). It is periodically carried out by the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and

Statistics (CAPMAS) in cooperation with Economic Research Forum (ERF). In the 1998 and 2006

surveys’ data on time use was only limited to women and children only. However, the new cycle in

2012 included children, women and men. Data from 2012 survey will be used in this study, to assess

the unpaid housework hours, work for the market and total working hours for both women and men

in Egypt, in the age category 15-65 years as specified in the definition of labor force.

It is worth noting that the survey covers an sample of more than 12000 families composed of 49186

individuals. It covers all Egyptian governorates, representing both rural and urban settings. The

survey, also provides data on respondents differentiated by gender, age, level of education, age,

37

marital status, employment status(employed/unemployed), type of work, income, and wealth

indicators (economic level) 78

. In general, the key features of the survey are in accordance with

similar surveys in many advanced industrial countries, in terms of the sample size, the target age

group and taking into account the influence of public holidays and the intensity of housework (e.g.

providing child care while performing a housework activity), as well as the nature of the used survey,

i.e. asking respondents about the time spent on each housework activity during a specific period of

time

According to the questionnaire form, questions and data recording of unpaid housework are divided

into seven main groups, as follows

- Farming activities and animal and poultry breeding for the family consumption including

cutting grass, harvesting, making cheese and butter

- Shopping for the family, including purchasing food, cloths, house necessities, or transporting

family members to their activities

- Construction or maintenance work in the family house.

- Domestic activities including food preparation, washing dishes and bowls, laundry and

ironing, cleaning the house.

- Fetching water, collecting firewood for the oven or any other purposes.

- total dedication to care for children, the elderly and the sick.

- caring for children and the elderly along with other activities at the same time.

Although this division provides a comprehensive list comprising all types of housework activities we

would like to assess, yet it poses some research difficulties;

a) combining child care and care for the elderly in one group

b) Caring activities are not detailed, so that time for specific activities could be separated, e.g.

time allocated to help with homework

c) Combining item for transporting family members to their activities’ locations with the item for

shopping, which means that time spent on taking children to school or the training activities

or repeated visits to a hospital could not be separated

d) Combining fetching water with other tasks in the same item

In our view, data presented as such limits the researcher’s ability to study the relationship between

the declining state's role in providing essential public services, (education, health and clean water)

78

- Ragui Assaad and Caroline Kraft, The Egypt Market Panel Survey: Introducing The 2012 Round, ERF, working

Paper 758, June 2013

38

and the increasing housework burden, particularly in rural areas.

This division also raises the problem of choosing which market wage, to evaluate the value of

working hours spent on the care for children and the elderly: would it be the salary for a nanny? Or

the salary for an elderly companion? How could you evaluate time on helping with homework if

you don’t have separate data on that specific item.

Third, features of the study sample age group 15 > 65 years

The Study focus on evaluation of the value of unpaid work in the age category 15-> 65 years as

specified in the definition of labor force. We used data from LEMPS 2012 to extract time use data

for this age group, and consequently got a sample of 30.065 individuals.

1. Sample distribution according to gender

% Number Gender

49.4 14848 Male 50.6 15217 Female 100 30065 Total

2. Rural/ Urban distribution

Total Urban Rural Gender

Number % Number % Number

14848 49.1 6691 49.6 8157 Male

15217 50.9 6933 50.4 8284 Female

30065 100 13624 100 16441 Total

100 45.3 54.7 Proportional share

3. Sample distribution according to Social Status

Total Females males Status

% Number % Number % Number

7.8 2335 7.4 11121 8.2 1214 Below marriage age 21.0 6304 14.1 2150 28.0 4154 Never married 0.2 72 0.3 43 0.2 29 Engaged 66.1 19863 69.4 10564 62.6 9299 Married 1.2 369 1.8 279 0.6 90 Divorced 3.7 1122 7.0 1060 0.4 62 Widowed 100 30065 100 15217 100 14848 Total

39

4. Distribution of married individuals according to family size

Married individuals were distributed according to the number of family members, rather

than the number of children because the data in the survey on the number of children

belonged to women only. Consequently, comparison between men and women in terms of

the number of housework hours could not be established. Moreover the survey data are

focused only on married women (18 - 49 years) and as such does not cover the whole age

group of our research.

Total Females males Family size

% Number % Number % Number

0.3 68 0.5 57 0.1 11 One person 10.8 2152 11.4 1202 10.2 950 2 18.1 3591 18.4 1944 17.7 1647 3 24.7 4909 24.3 2567 25.2 2342 4

20.9 4142 20.4 2152 21.4 1990 5

25.2 5001 25.0 2642 25.4 2359 More than 5

100 19863 100 10564 100 9299 Total

5. Sample Distribution according to standard of living

Survey data includes a breakdown of the respondents into five ascending groups each

representing 20% of the total respondents, according to the wealth score index. To translate

these five levels to the poor and the average level and the wealthy, I resorted to the population

decimal division by expenditure used in the “Income, Expenditure and Consumption

2012/2013” Study of CAPMAS, bearing in mind that study estimated percentage of

population below the poverty line as 26.3%.

The decimal division of the population is distributed according to the levels of expenditure

as follows:

Population Category % of total Expenditure

Less than 10% 4.1

10% > 20% 5.4

20% -Less than 30% 6.3

30% -Less than 40% 7.0

40% -Less than 50% 7.8

50% -Less than 60% 8.7

60% -Less than 70% 9.8

40

70% -Less than 80% 11.3

80% -Less than 90% 13.9

90% -100 25.7

Assuming that the best situation is where each population segment has similar share of

spending, and taking into consideration the above results of the decimal population

distribution, we translated the survey’s five living standards, and distributed the sample as

follows:

Poor the least 20% of the survey individuals

Poor -Below average 20% - less than 40% of the survey individuals

Lower average level 40% - less than 60% of the survey individuals

Average 60% - less than 80% of the survey individuals

Above average - high 80% - 100% of the survey individuals

6. Sample Distribution according to employment/unemployment

Total Females males Family size

% Number % Number % Number

46.3 13911 17.3 2629 76 11282 Employed 53.7 16154 82.7 12588 24 3566 unemployed 100 30065 100 15217 100 14848 Total

41

Fourth, Methods of Estimating the monetary value of the unpaid housework

hours

There are three main methods acknowledged globally. Each has its theoretical and practical bases;

and has its scientific and applied limits.79

A. Alternative Opportunity Cost

This method builds upon a basic assumption; that the time any person spends on unpaid

housework could have been otherwise spent on paid work (job). Consequently, we can

estimate the monetary value of the housework hours, according to the payment/hour for the

possible alternative job, this person could have. On the theoretical level, significant criticism

of this method is that it leads to the determining unequal pay for equal work. Although the time

spent on house cleaning or food preparation often requires the same effort and skills, whether

performed by an engineer or a simple worker, according to the opportunity cost the engineer’s

payment/hour will be estimated higher, and thus there will be unequal pay for an hour of equal

work.

On the other hand, the alternative opportunity cost could seem a logical method for estimating

the value of housework in case of a woman who has to sacrifice her income and resign or have

unpaid leave for family care. However, the matter gets harder when using this method to

evaluate housework value for people outside the labor force, e.g. persons on pension, or those

who have never been in paid work that can be used as a basis for estimation. In the latter case,

it will require an assumption for the type of work suitable for the abilities and qualifications of

each person and the payment/hour that s/he might have get.

In addition to such criticisms, undoubtedly this method assumes that the “alternative work

opportunity” suitable for the qualifications, skills and potentials of every person is already

available and accessible immediately and continuously at all times. Yet, such an assumption is

79

For more details on methods of evaluation unpaid housework see:

Ann Chadeau, What is Households' Non-Market Production Worth? OECD Economic Studies No. 18, Spring 1992.

- Johnna Varjonen et al., Satellite Accounts on Household Production: Eurostat Methodology and Experiences to Apply

it, Statistics Finland, Working Papers 1/2014.

- Gianna C. Giannelli et al., GDP and the Value of Caretaking: How Much does Europe Care? IZA, Discussion Paper

No. 5046, July 2010.

- UNRISD, United Nations Institute for Social Development, "Gender Pattern and Value of Unpaid Work" – findings for

China's first large scale Time Use Survey, October 2012.

- Malika Hamdad, Valuing Households' Unpaid Work in Canada, 1992 and 1998: Trends and Sources of Change,

Statistics Canada, May 2003.

- World Bank, Valuing Women's Work, World Human Development Report 1992, Chapter 4.

42

far from reality in general, and contradicts with current situation in Egypt in particular, where

unemployment rates are high, especially among women.

B. Specialist Market Replacement Cost

This method assumes that each service of unpaid housework services can be obtained either

through purchasing from the market or hiring someone to do it, and that having these services

for free within the family means saving the money that, otherwise, be spent in the market.

Therefore, the value of each type of housework is calculated according to the average wage for

similar work in the market, i.e. the value of an hour of cooking meals is calculated according to

the average hour wage for a cook in a restaurant, an hour spent on transporting children to

school equals average hour wage for a private driver, and hour spent on washing and ironing

cloths equals average hour wage for a worker in laundry .. and so on.

The main criticism of this method is that it assumes that the productivity of the family member

for the unpaid service at home could be to the productivity of the professional worker in the

market, and that both of them are working in similar conditions, a matter that might not be

logical for many housework activities, at least in terms of the timing of working hours and

supervision on it.

On the other hand, the application of this method requires knowledge of the average market

wage for a huge range of detailed services that are provided freely at home. In practice, it is

difficult to get detailed data on it.

C. Generalist Market Replacement Cost

To overcome the difficulty of asymmetrical productivity and different working conditions in

the family compare to a professional worker in the market, the group of activities related to

cooking, cleaning, washing, ironing, taking care of the house and the purchase of supplies ...

etc. Is valued according to the market average wage of a housekeeper, on the grounds such

work is precisely carrying out most of these services (except for educational assistance).

Similarly, a nanny’s average wage would be used to value working hours spent on child care

43

and the average wage of the elderly companion to assess the time spent in the caring for the

elderly.

Theoretically, some views call for specifying higher wage for educational support as it

represents specialized work on the one side and it provides a public service for the community,

which is the formation of the human capital.

Chosen methodology for valuing unpaid housework in Egypt

Experiences of different countries and conclusions of different studies in terms of estimating the

value of housework indicate that the choice of remuneration eventually depends on available data.

Yet, in all cases, the specialist market replacement method is excluded since it entails detailed data

on wages in a large list of business. In the case of Egypt, and in the light of the available data, we

resorted to the selected following:

1. For the alternative opportunity cost:

we used the average wage for both women and men at the national level as an expression of

the alternative opportunity cost.

2. for the Generalist replacement market wage:

Theoretical and empirical literature had indicated the importance of distinguishing between all

housework activities on the one hand, and the work on care for the child, the sick and the

elderly on the other hand. In consistence with the above, we searched for the generalist

replacement wages for each group of these activities within available data., we have noted the

following:

a. unavailability of official data on working hours and wages of domestic servants,

nannies and elderly companion

b. CAPMAS data on working hours and wages according to economic activities, includes

data on “individuals in the sector of domestic services for private families”, which are

the wages that can be used to value the house work. However data available from

CAPMAS stops at 2007.80

c. More recent data on working hours and wages according to activity sectors integrates

the sector of “domestic services for private families” within the “activities on other

80

CAPMAS, annual Statistics Book for the Egyptian Arab Republic 2013, work statistics, table 1.9.4

44

services”, which includes also “regional and international organizations and

institutions”, and “incompletely defined activities”81

or with “other activities for

personal services”82

d. More important, wages level for “other activities for personal services” are considered

very low (less than 3 LE/hour) compare to the average agreed cost in reality83

e. Data on wages in educational services are available, however we opt not to use it in

estimating value of activities on care for the child, the sick and the elderly. One the

one hand this activity is limited to specialized educational services and does not

represent the range of activities under the care for the child, the sick and the elderly.

On the other hand data available are restricted to private sector.

In the light of all the above we decided to use the following wages as an expression of the generalist

replacement methodology, a) wages for food and accommodation as alike for housework, and b)

wages for health and social work activities as alike for care for the child, the sick and the elderly

81

IBID table 2.9.4 82

CAPMAS, annual newsletter on employment, wages and working hours’ statistics. 2012 table 2and 2013 table 1.1 8383

CAPMAS, annual newsletter on employment, wages and working hours’ statistics. 2012 table 2and 2013 table 2

45

Appendix for Chapter 3

Main features of the time use survey in Egypt 2012

Compared to surveys prepared according to international standards

The questionnaire Population

number

(million)

Sample size

(individual)

Sample age

group

Survey period State

Questions on activities

during previous week * 82.550 49186 6-64 March – June 2012 Egypt

None available 8.800 12824 6 and above January 2005 - January 2006 Belgium

Questions on 2 days,

one of them during the

weekend

73.641 12655 10 and above April 2001 - April 2002 Germany

Questions on one day

only

37.636 46774 10 and above April 2001 - April 2002 Spain

Record of all activities

during full day

47.231 15441 15 and above February 1998 - February 1999*

Except for 4-18 Aug. and 21 Dec. - 4 Jan.

France

None available 2.115 3804 10 and above February- august 2003

February – October 2003

Latvia

None available 3.454 4768 10 and above January – December 2003 Lithuania

None available 8.206 10792 15-84 September 1999 – September 2002 Hungary

None available 30.904 20264 15and above Beginning of June 2003- end of May

2004

Poland

None available 1.990 6190 10 and above April 2000 – March 2001 Slovenia

None available 4.451 5332 10 and above March 1999 – March 2000 Finland

None available 6.538 3998 20 - 84 October 2000 September 2001 Sweden

None available 53.016 10366 8 and above June 2000 – September 2001 UK

Questions on two

successive days

3.674 3211 9 - 79 February 2000 – February 2001 Norway

Questions on two

successive days

4.298 2739 16 - 74 March 2001 – October 2001 Denmark

Record of all activities

during full day

13.574 6338 12 and above January 2003 – December 2003 Netherland

None available 20.076 17751 10 and above August and September 2000 Romania

I will now ask about family tasks and activities for consumption or services for your family which you did during the

past 7 days, and the time you took for doing them. (individual questionnaire, chapter 4, section 4.3 family tasks during the

past 7 days)

Table Sources:

- Ragui Assaad and Caroline Kraft, The Egypt Market Panel Survey: Introducing the 2012 Round, ERF,

working Paper 758, June 2013

- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division, Directorate of Employment, Labour and Social

Affairs, Time Use for Work, Care and Other Activities, 2011, p. 8

46

Chapter 4

Applying Methodology and Analysis of Results

According to the methodology presented in chapter 3, the weighted average of unpaid housework

hours and work hours for the market for individuals in the sample was calculated as a first step, then

it was applied to Egyptian population and finally the monetary value of the total hours of housework

was calculated.

First, results:

1. Men’s acceptance of providing housework:

Analysis of sample responses, both men and women, in the work age category (15 to less

than 65 years) points out to a marked decrease in the percentage of men who answered yes

when questioned if they have done housework during the previous week compared to women

who answered yes. There was a gap between men and women in accepting practicing

housework in all types of housework, yet it was biggest in case of housework activities (food

preparation, washing dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house) where men

respondent saying yes were only 4.4% compared to 88.6% of women respondent saying yes,

as shown in table (1).

A big gap also between men and women in accepting to do housework when it comes to

caring for children and elderly and the sick in the family. Percentage of men saying yes

ranged between 4-5% compared with 32% women.

The two main areas of housework which seem where both men and women share are

shopping for home (including purchase of food, clothing and household supplies home or

transporting one family members to their activities) and agricultural activities for family

consumption. For shopping 35% of men answered yes compared to 62% of women, while

for agricultural activities (breeding poultry or cattle or sheep, activities for the purpose of

household consumption, including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter, or cheese)

9 of women

It is no surprise. A glance to the respondents’ answers points out what the reality in the

Egyptian community emphasizes of the weak percentage of men who participate in

housework compared to women. What is left concerns the total working hours for both men

and women and its distribution between unpaid housework and paid market work.

47

Table (1)

Number and percentage of men and women who said yes to doing housework

Women Men Type of Work

% number % number 16.0 2440 8.8 1303 farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep, activities for

the purpose of household consumption, including cutting grass,

collecting harvest, making butter, or cheese 62.3 9482 34.7 5151 Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food, clothing and

household supplies home or transporting one family members too

their activities 1.9 285 4.9 723 construction or maintenance activities at family home 88.6 13487 4.4 651 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing dishes and

bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 5.4 819 1.1 160 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven or any other

purposes 32.2 4895 5.3 778 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 32.3 4915 4.0 599 Caring for children and the elderly along with other activities at the

same time 15217 14848 Total number of the sample

Calculated by the researcher from the Egyptian Labor Market Panel Survey ELMPS 2012

2. Average working hours of paid/unpaid work for women and men:

Sample data were used to get the weighted average of weekly working hours of the individual

women and men of the sample. Results emphasize a group of essential phenomena that time-

use data pointed out in different communities:

a. A big gap exists between the number of unpaid housework hours/week between men and

women. According to sample, women’s average unpaid housework hours/week 30.25

hours compared to 4.19 hours/week for men

b. House chore activities occupy the greatest part of women’s time provided in unpaid

housework, where house chore activities take almost 47% of the total time (14

hours/week) compared to 0.27 hours for men.

c. Caring for children, the elderly and the sick is still primarily a women’s responsibility.

The average working hours/week for women in this area counts to 10.47 hours compared

to 0.27 for men. It needs to be highlighted here, when asked about who takes care of their

children when they go to work, female respondents said in 56% of cases women

48

members of the family (mothers, mothers in law, daughters, sisters and grandmothers)

take up this responsibility. 84

Table (2)

Average working hours/week for men and women

Women men Type of work 30.25 4.19 Unpaid housework 1.23 1.10 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,

activities for the purpose of household consumption,

including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter,

or cheese 4.08 1.96 Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,

clothing and household supplies home or transporting one

family members too their activities 0.19 0.20 construction or maintenance activities at family home

13.97 0.27 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing

dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 0.31 0.05 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven

or any other purposes 5.18 0.32 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick

5.29 0.29 Caring for children and the elderly along with other

activities at the same time 6.42 37.01 Working for the market 36.67 41.20 total 15217 14848 Number of individuals

Table was constructed, and averages were Calculated by the researcher from

the Egyptian Labor Market Panel Survey ELMPS 2012

In addition to the common results between the Egyptian case and time-use studies in different

countries, table (2) indicate a set of interesting results. Despite the convergence of the average

work hours of both men and women in farming activities (and animal husbandry and the

preparation of dairy products for the purpose of family consumption), yet women still have a

slightly increased hours It activities of hours of work, there is still a slight increase in the

effort women with an average of 1.23 hours per week compared to 1.10 hours for men. Such

84

Responses of female respondents to question 8113 , chapter 8, section 8.1 female paid work, individual questionnaire

form. ELMPS 2012

49

a result reflects the reality in rural Egyptian settings, where women mainly carry out

activities related to breeding chickens and sheep, milking cattle and the preparation of dairy

products needed for family consumption, as well as contributing to some agricultural

activities, while it is men mainly who carry out agricultural activities, in addition to sharing in

some cattle breeding activities.

Table (2) also indicates the convergence of average house /week spent on house construction

and maintenance by both men 0.20 and women 0.19, despite the prevailing assumption that

such activities are usually done by men, and actually contrary to what similar studies in other

countries indicate that men are mainly responsible for such activities85

As for the paid market work86

sample data point shows that average working hours/week are

37.01 for men compared with only 6.42 for women. This reflects two important things in the

Egyptian context, first, as it Would come to mind, the decreased percentage of working

women (18% of women at the age of labor force) compared to men, 70%)87

; and second, the

increased proportional share of women working at the governmental sectors of total working

women (39% women compared with 23% men)88

; taking into consideration the low average

working hours in both sectors compared to the private sector.89

The official explanation of the decreased participation of women, is that Egyptian women are

reluctant to work and prefer to “stay at home to care for their families after marriage”.90

According to the sample data, when female respondent who didn’t continue their paid work,

what was the main reason for stopping, the first reason was disproof of fiancé /husband

(44.8%), while child care was only 15.5%. Having no appropriate job or proper salary

constituted 17.7% of cases91

. When these women were asked about willingness to go back to

work one day more than 60% answered yes, although this, sometimes, was linked to the need

to work, circumstances or type of available work92

85

See for example, Rachel Krantz – Kent, Measuring Time Spent in Unpaid Household Work: Results from the

American Time Use Survey, Monthly Labor Review, July 2009, p. 49 86

According to the questionnaire form of ELMPS 2012, the concept of work for the market indicates any type of work

with the aim of selling, marketing, getting wages, or any family project with the aim of selling or marketing. See

individual questionnaire form, chapter 4, section 4.1, question 4103, and section 4.4 question 4402 87

Adjusted from CAPMAS data, Annual Statistics’ Book for Egyptian Arab Republic, work statistics, table 4-1, and

population statistics, table 5-2 88

CAPMAS, the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 144 89

Average women’s working hours/week are 53 hours in the public sector and 57 hour in the private sector. See

CAPMAS data, Annual Statistics’ Book for Egyptian Arab Republic, work statistics, table 2-9-4 90

, CAPMAS the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 126 91

Responses to question 1-8120 women respondents 15-45 years ELMPS 2012 92

Responses to question 1-8121 women respondents 15-45 years ELMPS 2012

50

This stresses that “Egyptian women’s reluctance to work”, is no more than a mere lie, and

that the , and indicate that male oppression through the institution of marriage is the main

reason behind women leaving their paid jobs, as well as the difficulty of finding suitable

work or even any kind of work. All this reflects the economic stagnation, and problematics of

finding a decent work particularly in the private sector, in addition to discrimination against

women in employment opportunities.

With regards to employment conditions, women responses to question on the number of

indicated maternity leave they got for their first baby, that 18% didn’t have any paid

maternity leave, for those who got a leave, it was 2-6 weeks for 17% of cases93

. On the other

side, responses indicated that 47% of them work without social or health insurance94

, and

17.5 had no contracts, for those who have contracts 75% have contracts for one year or

less95

. Moreover, more than 70% of them do not have membership in any professional or

labor trade unions 96

As for discrimination against women, official data and reports confirms that men’s wages are

22% higher than women’s in the private sector97

, and discloses that “the majority of the

private sector’s facilities stress in their employment announcements that only men can

apply”98

These report indicate also that unemployment percentage among women is 24.1%

compared to 9.3% among men.99

Despite all factors of male oppression and working conditions deterring to women and

inappropriate to family duties, answers of the respondents in the ELMPS 2012, as previously

mentioned, confirm women’s pursuit of reconciliation between work duties and child care

demands, even if this entails to stop work for some time with readiness to return whenever

they have a chance.

When it comes to the total burden of work, table (2) shows that, on average, women in Egypt

work 36.64 hours/week compared to 41.20 hours for men, i.e. the average total working hours

for women represents 89% of men’s average. A matter that can be attributed on one hand to

93

Responses to question 8109 women respondents 15-49 years ELMPS 2012

94

Responses to questions 5129, 5157, women respondents 15-65 years ELMPS 2012 95

Responses to question 5142, women respondents 15-65 years ELMPS 2012 96

Responses to question 5155, women respondents 15-65 years ELMPS 2012 97

CAPMAS, the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 157 98

CAPMAS, the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 154

99

CAPMAS, results of the labor power research, 2012, page 3

51

the difference in the percentage of employed women, and on the other hand to the increased

proportional share of women working in the governmental and public sectors, and what all

this reflect within the Egyptian context, previously explained.

3. Distribution of average working hours for women and men by region Rural/Urban:

According to the sample respondents’ data, women in both rural and urban areas spend

housework hours that are several folds of those time spent by men. In rural areas women’s

average housework time is around 30.75 hours per week, compared to only 4.50 for men. In

urban areas, women’s average housework hours /week is 29.68 compared to only 3.84 hours

for men ass clear in table (3).

Table (3)

Average working hours/week for men and women in Rural/Urban settings

Urban Rural Type of Work Women Men Women Men

29.68 3.84 30.75 4.50 1- Unpaid housework 0.41 0.27 1.91 1.78 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle

or sheep, activities for the purpose of

household consumption, including cutting

grass, collecting harvest, making butter, or

cheese 4.55 2.16 3.69 1.80 Shopping for the home, including the

purchase of food, clothing and household

supplies home or transporting one family

members too their activities 0.20 0.22 0.19 0.19 construction or maintenance activities at

family home

14.35 0.41 13.66 0.16 Domestic activities including food

preparation, washing dishes and bowls,

laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 0.13 0.02 0.46 0.07 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel

for the oven or any other purposes 4.94 0.39 5.39 0.27 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and

the sick 5.10 0.37 5.45 0.23 Caring for children and the elderly along with

other activities at the same time 7.89 36.91 5.19 37.10 2 - Working for the market 37.57 40.75 35.94 43.60 total 6933 6691 8284 8157 Number of individuals

The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from ELMPS 2012 data.

.

52

The table shows some differences between unpaid housework in rural and urban areas.

Predictably, average hours spent on farming, animal husbandry and dairy products for

household consumption is at least 5 times the time spent on those tasks in urban areas. Also,

average time spent in the rural areas on "fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the

oven or any other purposes," is double the time spent on these activities in urban areas. In our

view, the continued existence of such functions in the Egyptian society reflects, in part, what

official data reveals that 9.2% of rural households and 4.7% of urban households still lack a

source of clean water100

.

On another level, table (3) shows that women in rural areas on average spend longer hours in

caring for children, the elderly and the sick, compare to urban women (10.84 and 10.04

respectively). This, in our view, requires a more detailed distribution of these hours between

child care on the one side, and care for the elderly and sick on the other, to understand the

difference regarding prevailing customs and traditions or the availability of medical

services. We should also take into consideration the nature of provided child care services,

particularly the percentage of educational support when studying time spent on this part of

housework in both urban and rural areas. Unfortunately, the Labor Market Panel Survey data

does not provide all these details.

As for the work total burden, sample data indicate that rural women on average work for 36

hours/week, compared to 43.6 hours/week for men. In urban areas, the average working

hours/week are 37.6 hours for women and 40.75 hours for men. This is a worthy noting result

since it indicates that the average total working hours for rural women is both less than those

for both rural men and urban women. In our view, such result reflects a downward bias to

lowest estimates with regards to rural women working hours for the market, which according

to the ELMPS data is around 5.2 hours/week compared to 7.9 hours/week for women in

urban areas.

This divergence in estimating women's working hours in the market in both rural and urban

areas could be attributed, partly, to the high percentage of women working in the informal

sector in rural areas compared to urban areas, and to the fact that the largest percentage of

women working in the informal sector in rural work without pay. CAMAS data indicate that

70% of women in rural areas are employed in the informal sector, compared to 12.6% of

100

CAPMAS, Annual Statistics’ Book for Egyptian Arab Republic 2013, Population statistics, table 1.6.7

53

women in urban areas101

. It Pepin women currencies in the informal sector in rural 6.62% in

exchange for 3-year only 41% of women working in the informal sector in urban areas.

62.6% of rural women in the informal sector are considered “mainly unpaid workers

contributing in various ways in the family and productive activities", compared to only 41.3

of urban women working in the informal sector.102

It might be that the current type of the survey questionnaire didn’t take fully into account that

aspect of women’s work. Extracted data, for our research sample, indicate that the percentage

of rural working women without social insurance is about 66%, and those working without

contracts is slightly less than 22%. These figures, in our view, is much less than the official

figures about. rural women in the informal sector (70%), as mentioned before.

It should be noted that the survey’s questions define work for the market as” all work for the

purpose of sale or marketing, getting wage, or any family project with the purpose of sale or

marketing”. Although the concept is sound, yet, when the bulk of respondents’ work is for

the family and unpaid, they might get confused whether their work could be counted as work

for the market103

. Not to mention that farming in rural Egypt is predominated by what is

known as the “Muzamalah” (companionship) method, where women help other families in

the village in some of the seasonal farming activities, and women of those families would, in

return, do the same with other women’s families. This part of women’s work is widespread in

rural Egypt.104

, and in our opinion, the specified domains for market labor in the survey fails

to take it into account105

. If such work is calculated, and if all women’s work (paid/unpaid)

in the informal sector are enlisted, we might have different results, and the average total

working hours of rural women might be higher than those for urban women.

101

CAPMAS, the Woman and Man in Egypt 2011, page 147

102

CAPMAS, IBID, page 147 103

Survey organizers admitted that such confusion could happen, and tried to warn interviewers to mistakes that can

happen in this regard. ”the list might lack women working on their own particularly in activities practiced at home, e.g.

selling vegetables, fruits, candy, diary products, eggs, or sewing, embroidery, knitting for others, or handmade cages,

carpets, spinning wool or cotton, etc.

104

See for example, Saqr, Basheer, “Egyptian Farmer does not get bitten twice from the same burrow: On organizational

forms of Farmers’ struggles in Egypt. Studies And Research Center for Labor and Traditional Movements in the Arab

World. May 2010 http://www.ahewar.org/debat/s.asp?aid=216701&t=3 105

The questionnaire specifies 17 work areas which do not include helping others in farming activities. Individual

questionnaire, chapter 4. Section 4.2, ELMPS 2012

54

Table (4)

Average working hours/week for men and women according to social status

Unmarried Married Type of Work Women Men Women Men 13.80 2.88 37.27 5.03 Unpaid housework

0.62

0.80

1.49

1.30

Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,

activities for the purpose of household consumption,

including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making

butter, or cheese 2.14 1.22 4.82 2.41 Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,

clothing and household supplies or transporting one

family members too their activities 0.15 0.14 0.21 0.25 construction or maintenance activities at family home 8.96 0.46 16.37 0.16 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing

dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the

house 0.23 0.02 0.35 0.06 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the

oven or any other purposes 0.73 0.13 7.00 0.44 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 0.97 0.11 7.03 0.41 Caring for children and the elderly along with other

activities at the same time 7.35 28.13 6.56 44.77 Working for the market 21.15 31.01 43.83 49.80 total 2150 4154 10564 9299 Number of individuals

The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from the ELMPS 2012 data.

4. Distribution of average working hours for women and men according to Social Status:

Sample data indicate that marriage increases the burden of unpaid housework for both men and

women, but expectedly, this increase for women is a huge qualitative leap.

As table (4) shows, the average unpaid housework hours per week is 37.27 and 13.80 hours for

married women and unmarried women respectively. Married men also have higher average

hours of housework compared to unmarried men 5.03 and 2.8 hours respectively. Marriage

clearly expands the already existing gap between men and women with regards to housework

burden. The gap between married men and women is seven folds compared to five folds

between unmarried men and women.

The huge increase of average housework hours for married women encompasses all types of

housework, but is mainly concentrated in two items: a) care for children, elderly and sick

55

(more than 14 hours for married women compared to 1.7 for unmarried), and b) Domestic

activities (16.37 hours for mmarried women compared to 9 hours for the unmarried)

In case of men, the increase is mainly concentrated in the average hours for domestic activities

and transportation of family members (2.41 hours for married men compared to 1.22 for the

unmarried men, i.e. double the time). It is interesting that, despite the common perception that

Egyptian men accept to participate in domestic activities, the sample’s data reveals the

opposite. Married men spend less time on domestic activities compared to unmarried men (016

to 0.46 hours respectively). It seems that marriage shifts any burdens men used to carry before

marriage to women!106

On another level, table (4) indicates that the gap between married men and women total work

burden does not exceed 6 hours per week (49.8 hours for men compared to 43.8 hours for

women), whereas it is almost 10 hours between unmarried men and women (13 hours for men

compared to 21.15 for women). this indicates that the huge increase of married women’s

housework compensates for a good part of their decreased work hours in the market compared

to men.

5. Distribution of average working hours for women and men according to number of family

members107

:

Increased family size leads to increased burdens of women’s housework as shown in table (5).

The table points out two important issues. First, the huge jump of housework burden happens

when the family members become 3. The average women’s housework hours increases from

around 13 to 40 hours/week. Assuming that the third members means having a child, this table

underscores conclusions of similar studies that the big increase of housework burden for

married women happens with the first child, then slight increases with the increasing number

of children108

106

To confirm such a relation, requires panel study on a sample of men before and after marriage, a matter that is beyond

the main goal of our current study. 107

Married individuals were distributed according to the number of family members, rather than the number of children

because the data in the survey on the number of children belonged to women only. Consequently, comparison

between men

and women in terms of the number of housework hours could not be established. Moreover the survey data are focused

only on married women (18 - 49 years) and as such does not cover the whole age group of our research. See chapter 3 on

the methodology of measuring and assessment of the value of women’s housework in Egypt.

108

- Rachel Kraft – Krantz, Measuring Time spent in Unpaid Household Work: Results from the American Time Use

Survey, Monthly Labor Review, July 2009, p. 53

56

Second, after certain stage, and with the continued increase of family size, a slight regression

happens in women’s average housework. Table (5) indicates that maximum housework hours

(40.5 hours/week) is when the family members are 4, and regresses to 39.23 hours with the 5th

family member. It regresses again to 37.43 hours when the number of family members is

bigger than 5. This regression is concentrated mainly in: a) care for children, elderly and sick

where it decreases form 16.41 hours (4 family members) to 14 hours (more than 5 family

members) and b) domestic activities where it decrease from 17.29 hours (4 family members) to

15.74 hours (more than 5 family members). This might reflect, on one hand, support from

elder children in caring for the younger members of the family, and, on the other hand,

younger members, particularly girls, carrying out some domestic activities instead of the

mother and grandmother.

It is noted that the increase in family size do not lead to a similar leap in housework burden for

men. As shown in table (5), the slight increase in this burden is concentrated in farming

activities, animal husbandry and preparing dairy products for family consumption. This is

almost doubled, from 1.11 to 2.19 hours when the family size is more than 5 members, which

means that the increase in time spent tends to be in types of work that is in some way or

another are an extension of men’s regular work in the market.

On another level, table (5) highlights an important result; the gap between married women and

men with regards to the total work burden narrows clearly with the increase of family size. At

the level of 4 members family, the average total work hours for women is 48.23 hours; very

near to the average total work hours for men 50.34 hours. The convergence of total work

burden is not attributed only to women’s huge housework burden compared to men, but also to

the tangible increase of average number of hours of women’s work in the market, after the

shock of first child. This average increase from 5.15 hours/week when the family size is only 3

members, to 7.75 hours when the family size is 4 members.

Such a result might reflect that seeking additional income sources to keep up to the increasing

family expenses, and consequently increased working hours for the market, is not limited to

men. Is seems that the increased number of children leads women to work for the market to

face the increased family expenses. This could reinforce what we referred to earlier, 15% of

survey’s respondents emphasized that child care was one of the reasons to stop work; and 60%

of respondents agreed to return to work when there is an opportunity, and if the situation

necessitates.

57

Table (5)

Average working hours/week for men and women according to family size

Type of Work Number of family members 2 3 4 5 < 5

Men

Unpaid housework 4.45 4.62 4.77 4.87 5.96 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,

activities for the purpose of household consumption,

including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter, or

cheese

1.11 0.88 1.00 1.06 2.19

Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,

clothing and household supplies home or transporting one

family members too their activities

2.80 2.30 2.27 2.29 2.55

construction or maintenance activities at family home 0.10 0.24 0.22 0.31 0.31 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing

dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 0.32 0.15 0.19 0.12 0.12

Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven or

any other purposes 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.08

Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 0.04 0.54 0.57 0.54 0.33 Caring for children and the elderly along with other activities

at the same time 0.06 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.38

Work for the market 44.38 45.38 45.57 44.78 43.76 total 48.83 50.00 50.34 49.65 49.72

Number of individuals 950 1647 2342 1990 2359

women

Unpaid housework 12.94 39.93 40.48 39.23 37.43 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,

activities for the purpose of household consumption,

including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter, or

cheese

0.52 1.01 1.12 1.50 2.46

Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,

clothing and household supplies home or transporting one

family members too their activities

2.56 4.72 5.12 5.03 4.54

construction or maintenance activities at family home

0.10 0.15 0.23 0.29 0.19

Domestic activities including food preparation, washing

dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 8.32 16.07 17.29 17.24 15.74

Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven or

any other purposes 0.12 0.27 0.31 0.33 0.52

Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 0.59 9.24 8.36 7.40 6.56 Caring for children and the elderly along with other activities

at the same time 0.73 8.47 8.05 7.44 7.42

Work for the market 5.70 5.15 7.75 7.16 6.41 total 18.64 45.08 48.23 46.39 43.48

Number of individuals ** 1202 1944 2567 2152 2642

The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from the ELMPS 2012 data

. * Does not include 11 individuals, representing number of men in families composed of one person

** Does not include 57 individuals, representing number of women in families composed of one

person

58

6. Distribution of average working hours for women and men according to

Employment/unemployment109

:

Women’s work in the market does not correlate with any decrease with regards to their

housework burdens which continue to be their responsibilities. According to sample’s data

women in Egypt suffer what is known as the double shift work, i.e. one shift in the market

and another at home. Table (6) indicate that women work on average 37.15 hours/week for

the market and around 31.53 hours at home, i.e. a total of 68.68 hours/week compared to

53.60 hours for men.

Table (6)

Average working hours/week according to Employment/unemployment

Unemployed Employed Type of Work Women Men Women Men

29.94 1.95 31.53 4.89 1- Unpaid housework 1.00 0.15 2.33 1.41 Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,

activities for the purpose of household consumption,

including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making butter,

or cheese 3.86 1.16 5.10 2.20 Shopping for the home, including the purchase of food,

clothing and household supplies home or transporting one

family members too their activities 0.20 0.12 0.18 0.23 construction or maintenance activities at family home 13.96 0.25 13.94 0.27 Domestic activities including food preparation, washing

dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing, cleaning the house 0.30 0.02 0.31 0.05 Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the oven

or any other purposes 5.25 0.13 4.84 0.38 Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 5.37 0.12 4.83 0.35 Caring for children and the elderly along with other

activities at the same time - - 37.15 48.71 2 - Working for the market 29.94 1.95 68.68 53.60 total 12588 3566 2629 11282 Number of individuals

The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from the ELMPS 2012 data.

109

Married individuals were distributed according to the number of family members, rather than the number of children

because the data in the survey on the number of children belonged to women only. Consequently, comparison

between men

and women in terms of the number of housework hours could not be established. Moreover the survey data are focused

only on married women (18 - 49 years) and as such does not cover the whole age group of our research. See chapter 3 on

the methodology of measuring and assessment of the value of women’s housework in Egypt.

59

The double-shift work phenomenon might have disappeared in developed industrialized

countries110

. This could be attributed to laws and social organization guaranteeing community

participation in child care, and encouraging men’s participation in providing some of these

activities111

, or what the level of economic progress guarantees through the provision of

electrical home devices saving time and effort. However, the situation in developing

countries, including Egypt, is different, and the double shift work is a lived reality for

women.

Table (6) indicates the fact that the total work burden for working women in Egypt exceeds

that of men, the difference is that the greater part of working men work is paid work (91%),

while the greater part of women’s work is unpaid housework (46%). Added to this, as

emphasized through official data, 48% of working women in Egypt, do work in the informal

sector. Moreover, 63% of women in the informal sector are unpaid in both rural 63% or

urban 41% set tings.

7. Distribution of average working hours for women and men according to standard of living

(wealth)112

:

One expects that the increase in the standard of living (wealth) would lead to decreasing

housework burden on women, since the increased wealth level provides the family with the

possibility of hiring someone to do good part of that work. Yet, data extracted from the

sample and shown in table (7) points out that this saying is basically true for the high wealth

levels. To the contrary, the housework burden increases for the middle class women,

compared to both wealthiest and poorest categories of women.

110

Cathrine Hakim, How Can Social policy and Fiscal Policy Recognize Unpaid Family Work, p. 1-2

www.Ise.ac.uklnewsandMedia/news/archives/2010/08/CathrineHakimRenewal.pdf

111

For more details see chapter two of this study on international experience in calculating value of unpaid housework 112

To clarify the methodology with regards to dividing wealth categories please refer to chapter three of this study on

methodology of measuring and assessment of the value of women’s housework in Egypt

60

Table (7)

Average housework hours according to the standards of living (wealth)

Type of Work Standards of living

poor Poor -

below

average

Lower

strata

of

average

Averag

e level

Above

average -

high

Men Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or

sheep, activities for the purpose of household

consumption, including cutting grass, collecting

harvest, making butter, or cheese

1.97 1.47 1.13 0.63 0.20

Shopping for the home, including the purchase of

food, clothing and household supplies home or

transporting one family members to their activities

1.73 1.91 1.89 1.99 2.31

construction or maintenance activities at family home 0.26 0.22 0.24 0.15 0.14 Domestic activities including food preparation,

washing dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing,

cleaning the house

0.22 0.21 0.23 0.27 0.44

Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the

oven or any other purposes 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.01

Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 0.21 0.24 0.33 0.42 0.42 Caring for children and the elderly along with other

activities at the same time 0.12 0.27 0.28 0.40 0.42

total 4.58 4.39 4.14 3.88 3.94 Number of individuals 3000 3175 3096 2800 2777

women Farming activities, breeding poultry or cattle or sheep,

activities for the purpose of household consumption,

including cutting grass, collecting harvest, making

butter or cheese

1.92 1.59 1.35 0.89 0.33

Shopping for the home, including the purchase of

food, clothing and household supplies home or

transporting one family members too their activities

3.67 4.19 4.21 4.19 4.16

construction or maintenance activities at family home 0.20 0.14 0.26 0.21 0.16 Domestic activities including food preparation,

washing dishes and bowls, laundry and ironing,

cleaning the house

12.74 13.96 14.55 14.77 13.87

Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the

oven or any other purposes 0.62 0.36 0.29 0.17 0.07

Full-time caring for children, the elderly and the sick 4.19 5.31 5.76 6.10 4.55 Caring for children and the elderly along with other

activities at the same time 4.89 5.45 5.75 5.60 4.72

total 28.23 31.00 32.17 31.93 27.86 Number of individuals ** 3053 3178 3105 2934 2947

The table was constructed and averages calculated by the researcher from the ELMPS 2012 data.

61

.* Standards of living were prepared by matching the Quintet division by the wealth score used in the

ELMPS, and the CAPMAS decimal expenditure segments (in the income expenditure and consumption

research 2012/2013 page 39). See explanation of measuring and estimating value of housework

methodology in chapter 3 of this study.

As table (7) indicates, the average housework hours for the poor women segment is 28.23

hours per week, increases to 32 hours in the third and fourth segments representing the

intermediate standard of living, whereas it is limited to 27.6 hours for the above the middle

and high level .

With regards to the details of unpaid housework, it is noted that moving to a higher strata is

linked to continuous decrease in two specific types of housework: farming activities and

fetching water and fuel. This reflects to a great extent the changes associated with improved

standard of living, mainly living in areas with better housing and facilities, increased

purchasing power of agricultural and animal products from the market, and the ability to hire

someone to carry out such activities.

As for domestic activities and care for children, the elderly and the sick, table (7) show

increased average working hours of women at the wealth intermediate segments compared to

the poor segment, then its decrease in the above average-high segment. In our view, this result

reflects what is noted for the Egyptian middle class, where the mother takes responsibility for

housework activities and allows her children to dedicate their time for their studies, contrary to

the situation within limited income families, where girls, even during schooling, help in

housework leading to distribution of those activities on a wider number of family members.

This result may also reflect conclusions of some studies explaining differentiation between

men and women with regards to housework; that technological progress an availability of

electric devices helped decreasing physical effort in housework, but didn’t necessarily decrease

the time spent in these activities. These studies see that electrical home appliances availability

lead middle class women to do housework by themselves rather than of hiring others to do it.

The decreased physical effort encouraged middle class women to repeat frequently some

“strenuous” domestic chores. Such studies argue that the presence of electric washing machine

62

for example, reduced the washing process effort, but enhanced the repetition of this process to

enable the daily changing of family clothes, a matter that was limited to rich class113

In all instances, it is clear that middle class Egyptian women bear the greatest burden of

housework, and that such burden might not be tangibly reduced except at high levels of wealth.

Upon dividing the 5th

segment of wealth levels to separate the highest 10% segment of respondents,

it was noticed that the average work hours spent on housework activities was reduced 12.78

hours/week compared to almost 15 hours/week for middle class women.

Interestingly, Table (7) also shows an increased average housework hours in the area of care

for children, the elderly and the sick for middle class women (11-12 hours /week) compared to

women in both the poor and high segments (almost 9 hours/week for both). This might reflect what

Marxists feminists argue, that middle class women play a significant role in contributing to

children’s education, where the schooling system presumes that there is someone at home helping

children in studying, a task that mothers usually do.114

It might also reflect the deterioration of the

public education system in Egypt, and the increasing focus on the role of home and private lessons to

compensate for the regressing role of state.

Although it is hard to assess the exact influence of these factors on the results of our sample (since

the survey does not have separate questions on child care on the one hand and the care of the elderly

and sick on the other hand, or questions on educational support separate from the rest of care work),

yet, according to sample data, it is mainly mothers who bear the responsibility of helping children in

studying. Answers of children respondents in the survey (6 years and above) to the question on who

helps the child in studying, identified mothers in 61% of cases compared to fathers in 12% of

cases115

.

Finally, table (7) indicates that the huge gap between average housework hours for women and men

still exists at all wealth levels, with a slight increase at the intermediate segments reflecting the

increasing burden of work for women in these segments as explained before.

113

Loree A. Prineau, A Woman's Place: Unpaid Work in the Home, The American Journal of Occupational therapy,

November 1992, p. 983

114

See chapter one of this study, on housework in economic thought 115

Answers to question number 2173, individual questionnaire, chapter 2, section 2.1 ELMPS 2012

63

Second estimation to women’s total contribution in the economic activity

measured by total work hours:

Estimating women’s total contribution to economic activity in Egypt measured as total work

hours requires calculating total annual work hours for women and men in Egypt in age category

within the age of work (15-less than 65 years). We calculated these hours for the year ending in June

2012116

through applying results on average work hours per week for men and women of our sample

on total population in 2012.

The first step was calculating the number of population in the specific age group as shown in

table (8),with a total population 53.3 million, divided into 49% women and 51% men

116

The survey was conducted during the period March-June 2012

64

Table (8)

Number of Population in Egypt 2012

Age Category 15 – less than 65

Total women Men

29294037 14354717 14939320 Rural

23976279 11822864 12153415 Urban

53270316 26177581 27092735 Total

Source:

Calculated from CAPMAS data, annual book 2013, Population statistics, tables (2-5)

Deciding the number of female and male population in the labor force age group, the number

of total annual work hours for each of them was calculated as shown in table (9). It is clear from the

table that the women’s total work hours during the year ending in June 30th , 2012, reached 50.058

million work hours compared with 58.197 work hours for men. Thus, women’s contribution

represented 46.2% of the total work hours during the aforementioned financial year.

Table (9)

Total Working hours for women and men

Financial year ending June 2012

total women Men Type of work

47213 41294 5919 Unpaid housework

61042 8764 52278 Paid work for the market

108255 50058 58197 Total working hours

100 46.2 53.8 Proportional share

Calculated by the research based on

Average individual’s annual work hours for the = (average weekly work hours ÷ 7) x (365 days)

Annual work hours for men and women = average annual work hours x men and women

population in June 2012

65

Table (10) displays total work hours for men and women distributed by type of work. For

men, unpaid housework represents 10% of their total work hours compared to 90% work for the

market. For women, unpaid housework represents 82.5% compared 17.5% to work for the

market.(This stresses the repeated phenomenon in time use studies in different communities that the

major part of women’s work is unpaid.

Table (10)

Distribution of Total Working hours for women and men according to Type of work

Financial year ending June 2012

Women Men

Type of work

% Hours

(million)

%Hours

(million)

82.5 41294 10.2 5919 Unpaid housework

17.5 8764 89.8 52278 Paid work for the market

100 50058 100 58197 Total working hours

Calculated form data in the previous table

It is obvious from the above that if women represent 49% of the labor force age category, they

contribute at least 46.2% of the total working hours for this category,( taking into consideration

the aforementioned reservations regarding women’s average work hours in rural areas). This

refutes the saying on decreased women’s contribution to economic activities in Egypt.

66

Third: Estimating the monetary value of women’s unpaid housework and its

percentage to GDP alternative co

To estimate the monetary value of unpaid housework, we used both the alternative opportunity cost

and the generalist alternative cost ass explained earlier in chapter 3.

The results of using both methods was as follows:

1- Estimates using Alternative opportunity cost

National average of payment per hours for both women and men was used as an expression of

alternative opportunity cost. Accordingly, unpaid housework in Egypt for the financial year ending

June 30th

2012 was estimated to be 524.5 Billion LE, representing 34.8% of GDP, divided between

women 30.2% of GDP (455.0 Billion LE) and men 4.6% of GDP (69.5 Billion LE) as shown in table

(11)

Table (11)

Estimation of unpaid housework according to Alternative Opportunity cost

Financial year ending June 2012

Total Women Men

47213 41294 5919 No of Hours (million)

11.018 11.745 Average wage for hour at the national

level *

524495.95 454977.29 69518.66 Monetary value (million)

1508527.1

GDP in current prices (million)**

34.77 30.16 4.61 Percentage of unpaid housework of

GDP

* calculated using data on average work and monetary wages/week of workers in both public

and private sectors. CAPMAS. Annual Employment, wages and work hours Newsletter, 2012,

page 7.

** GDP in current prices cost of production factors. Ministry of Planning, Egyptian economy

total indicators. Annual series. www.mop.gov.eg

67

2- Estimates using generalist wage cost

In accordance with theoretical discourse and empirical experiences in using the generalist wage cost

method, we separated between all types of domestic care activities on the one hand, and the care for

children, the elderly and the sick activities on the other hand. We chose wage/hour for both women

and men in the accommodation and food sector as wage for domestic activities, and wage/hour for

both women and men in the health services and social work sector as the wage for care for children,

the elderly and the sick activities. (see methodological details in chapter 3).

Table (12)

Estimation of unpaid housework according to Generalist Alternative cost

and its % of GDP

Financial year ending June 2012

Total women Men

House care services

32059 27002 5057 No of Hours (million)

6.339 5.644 Wage/hour *

199808.53 171165.68 28642.85 Monetary value (million)

Care for children and elderly

15154 14292 862 No of Hours (million)

9.543 8.717 Wage/hour **

143902.61 136388.56 7514.05 Monetary value (million)

343711.14 307554.24 36156.90 Total Monetary value for housework (million)

1508527.1 GDP in current prices (million)

22.79 20.39 2.40 Percentage of unpaid housework to GDP

* average wage /hour for accommodation and food activities

** average wage/hour for health services and social work activities

Source:

Calculated using data on average work and monetary wages/week of workers in both public and

private sectors. CAPMAS. Annual Employment, wages and work hours Newsletter, 2012, page 7.

As table (12) shows, women’s working hours in domestic services and in providing care for children,

the elderly and the sick, were estimated at 171.2 and 136.4 Billion LE respectively, with a total

68

value for women’s housework as 307.6 Billion LE (20.4% of GDP) in the fiscal year ending June

30th

2012 .

Estimates of the monetary value of men’s housework were 28.6 Billion LE of domestic activities, 7.5

Billion LE for activities for care for the children, the elderly and the sick, with a total 36.1 Billion LE

(2.4% of GDP) in the fiscal year ending June 30th

2012.

Thus total estimates of total values of housework during the fiscal year ending June 30th

2012 was 343.7 Billion LE (22.8% of GDP distributed between women 20.4% and men 2.4% as

clear from table (12).

It is clear from the above, that estimates of unpaid housework value and its percentage to

the GDP differs according to the type of wages used in estimation. The monetary value of

housework using the Generalist Market Replacement Cost, is much lower than the value estimated

using the alternative opportunity cost, which is attributed to the low levels of wages in sectors

representing housework compared to the general average of wages at the national level. Following is

a briefing of concluded results:

1- Value estimates of housework ranged between 343.7 and 524.5 Billion LE, representing

respectively a percentage ranging between 22.8% and 34.7% of the total GDP in the

fiscal year ending June 30th

2012

2- Value estimates of women’s housework ranged between307.6 and 455 Billion LE,

representing respectively what ranges between 20.4% and 30.2% of the total GDP in the

fiscal year ending June 30th

2012. Using the simple median of these two values, we can

say that women’s housework contribute almost 25% of the total GDP.

69

Conclusions and Recommendations

What we learnt? What is Next

The System for National Accounts by which abide all countries of the world, still excludes unpaid

housework as it does not represent an economic activity for the market. However, the evolution of

economic thought and feminist movement during the twentieth century, particularly since the seventies,

lead gradually to recognizing the importance of housework and its impact on community welfare.

Eventually, the UN Statistics commission acknowledged the necessity of preparing Satellite Accounts

to the SNA to address unpaid housework statistics and the distribution of the working hours on

housework between women and men. The commission underscored the significance of satellite

accounts to reaching a realistic picture of the economic performance and social progress, which GDP

indicator fails to reflect it comprehensively.

Measuring and estimating the value of unpaid housework and results of studies in different countries of

the world clarified the great contribution of housework to community welfare, and that women carry the

major part of that work. Time use surveys showed that in many times women’s total work hours exceeds

those of men, and consequently, women get less hours for rest and leisure. All this helped the feminist

movement all over the world to demand the right to balance work and life responsibilities, and

redistribution of these responsibilities between women and men in the family, as well as supporting

demands for equal pay, taking into consideration that child cares specifically represents a kind of public

services and a human investment for the whole community and not just for the family.

Experiences of different countries reveal varying community responses, with regards to degree or extent,

to some women’s demands whether at the level of trials to redistribute child care responsibilities

between men and women in the family, or state involvement to carry out some of those responsibilities,

as well as providing a “ family friendly” work environment. Some improvement had been achieved with

regards to secure the principle of “equal pay for equal work”. There is also an increasing trend to

acknowledge women’s right to share the wealth established during marriage as it is the result of joint

work of which unpaid housework is an essential part.

Our trial, based on data from ELMPS 2012, to measure and assess the value of women’s unpaid

housework and its percentage to GDP lead to the following main results:

70

1- Egyptian Women represent 49% of the population in the labor force age category. They

contribute at least around 46.2% of the total paid/unpaid work hours within this category, a fact

which refutes the claim of low contribution of women in the economic activity.

2- Estimates of the housework value ranged between 307.6 to 455 Billion LE, which represents

respectively 20.4% - 30.2% of GDP in the fiscal year ending June 30th 2012. Using the simple

median of those two estimates, we can say that women’s housework contribution in Egypt

represents around 25% of GDP.

3- Results from the sample data underscore the huge gap between women and men in terms of the

number of hours they contribute to housework; where women’s average housework hours/week

is 30.25 hours compared to 4.19 hours/week for men.

4- Domestic services activities consume the greater part of women’s time provided in unpaid

housework; 47% of the total time spent on housework with an average of 14 hours/week

compared to men 0.27 hours/week.

5- Care for children, the elderly and the sick activities are considered as primarily women’s

responsibility, with an average 10.47 hours/week compared to only one hour/week for men.

6- The burden of construction or maintenance activities at family home is distributed almost

equally between women and men (0.19 and 0.20 hours/week respectively) despite the prevailing

assumption that these are usually men’s responsibility and opposite to what similar studies in

western societies underscore, i.e. it is mainly men who carry out such activities.

7- In rural areas, the average housework hours/week is 30.75 and 4.50 for women and men

respectively. The average of time spent on “Fetching water, collecting firewood and fuel for the

oven or any other purposes” is double the time spent on these activities in urban areas. In our

view the permanence of such activities to begin with, in the Egyptian society reflects partly what

the official data reveals, that 9.2% of rural households and 4.7 of urban households still lack pure

water sources.

8- Marriage increases the burden of unpaid housework for both men and women. However, this

increase denotes a “qualitative leap” for married women whose average unpaid housework hours

/week is 37.27 hours compared to 13.80 for unmarried women. The gap between women and

men also increase with marriage to be seven folds between married couples, compared to five

folds between un married women and men.

9- Despite the common assumption on acceptance of Egyptian men to share housework activities,

the sample data, to the contrary, underscores that married men spend less time on such activities

compared to unmarried men indicating that marriage leads to shifting any burdens men used to

carry before marriage to women.

71

10- Increased number of family members leads to increased housework burden for women. The big

leap happens when the family members number is 3, where average housework hours/week

increases from 13 to around 40 hours/week. Assuming that the third member means having a

child, the study sample results emphasizes results of similar studies that the big increase of the

housework burden on women happens with the first child, then slight increases happen with the

following children.

11- The average women’s housework hours reaches its maximum (40.5 hours/week) when the

family size is 4, then it regresses to 37.43 when the family members are more than 5. This

regression is concentrated mainly in the “care for children, the elderly and the sick” and

“households activities”. This might reflect a generally accepted phenomenon in the Egyptian

society that older children provide support in caring for the younger members of the family, and

that younger members, particularly girls, carrying out some domestic activities instead of the

mother.

12- The gap between married women and men with regards to the total work burden narrows clearly

with the increase of family size. At the level of 4 members family, the average total work hours

for women is 48.23 hours; very near to the average total work hours for men 50.34 hours. The

convergence of total work burden is not attributed only to women’s huge housework burden

compared to men, but also to the tangible increase of average number of hours of women’s work

in the market, after the shock of first child. Such a result might reflect that seeking additional

income sources to keep up to the increasing family expenses, and consequently increased

working hours for the market, is not limited to men. Is seems that the increased number of

children leads women to work for the market to face the increased family expenses.

13- Working women in Egypt suffer from the double-shift work phenomenon, comprising two work

shifts, one in the market and another at home. Consequently, the total work hours for working

women is 68.68 hours/week compared to only 53.60 for men.

14- Although the total work burden for working women in Egypt exceeds that of men, the greater

part of working men work is paid work (91%), while the greater part of working women’s work

is unpaid housework (46%). Moreover, official data indicates that 48% of working women in

Egypt, work in the informal sector where the percentage of unpaid women is around 63% in rural

areas and 41% in urban areas.

15- Despite the common assumption that the higher standard of living (wealth) would lead to

decreasing housework burden on women as it provides the family with the possibility of hiring

someone to do good part of that work, yet, data from our sample points out that this saying is

72

basically true for the high wealth levels, but not for the middle class women whose housework

burden, to the contrary, increases compared to both wealthiest and poorest categories of women.

16- average housework hours in the area of care for children, the elderly and the sick increases in

case of middle class women (11-12 hours /week) compared to women in both the poor and high

segments (almost 9 hours/week for both. This might reflect what Marxists feminists say, that

middle class women play a significant role in contributing to children’s education, where the

schooling system presumes that there is someone at home helping children in studying, a task

that mothers usually do. It might also reflect the deterioration of the public education system in

Egypt, and the increasing focus on the role of home and private lessons to compensate for the

regressing role of state.

17- Although it is hard to assess the exact influence of these factors on the results of our sample,

since the survey does not have separate questions on child care on the one hand and the care of

the elderly and sick on the other hand, or questions on educational support separate from the rest

of care work, yet, according to sample data, it is mainly mothers who bear the responsibility of

helping children in studying. Answers of children respondents identified mothers in 61% of

cases compared to fathers in 12% of cases.

18- Study results expose the deception of “Egyptian women’s reluctance to work”, and their

preference to “stay at home after marriage to care for their families”. On the contrary, study

results indicate that male oppression through the institution of marriage is the main reason behind

women’s leaving their paid jobs. When women were asked about the main reasons for breaking

off their paid jobs, the first reason was disproof of fiancé /husband (44.8%), whereas child care

was only 15.5%.

19- “Family unfriendly” work environment, as well as the difficulty to find properly paid work, if

any, in the light of problems of economic stagnation and inappropriate conditions in the private

sectors and discrimination against women part of the reasons behind women ceasing to work.

17.7% of respondents reported that they stayed at home due to lack of proper work, proper wage

or even no work at all.

20- Women respondents’ answers emphasized their pursuit of reconciliation between work duties

and child care demands, even if this entails to stop work for some time with readiness to return

whenever they have a chance. In 60% of cases, respondents were willing to go back to work,

although this, sometimes, was linked to the need to work, circumstances or type of available

work. This result matches with what the study results revealed of increasing market working

hours after the “shock of first child”, and with increasing family members as mentioned before.

73

Study results emphasize that paid work, despite its great significance, is not by itself an enough

condition for emancipation of women and enhancing their status and capabilities to share in decision

making. Talking about emancipation would be nonsense if the paid work means double work shifts, one

outside the home and the other inside it, or if such paid work is occurring in the absence of any legal

protection, social insurance or unionist rights. Response of women respondents stressed that more than

47% work without social or health insurance, and 17.5% had no contracts, and that 75% of those who

have contracts, the contracts are for one year or less. Moreover, more than 70% of respondents do not

have membership in any professional or labor trade unions.

74

What’s Next:

Estimating the monetary value of housework and the total actual contribution of Egyptian women in

economic activity compared to men’s contribution, represents, despite its significance just one step to

establish objective basis for enhancing women’s social status and their right to decision making and to

balancing life responsibilities/work. In our view the road map in this respect includes a number of

urgent tasks at the level of national statistics and feminist movement. Most important of these:

1- Official Statistical Institutions should acknowledge the significance of unpaid housework, and

commit itself to integrating gender statistics in data on time spent on housework, as well as

preparation of periodic comprehensive estimates of housework activities and including it in

Satellite Accounts to the System of National Accounts, as provided by the United Nations.

2- Time use surveys, prepared periodically within the Egyptian Labor Market Panel Survey

(ELMPS) in cooperation between the Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics

(CAPMAS) and the Economic Research Forum (ERF), should be developed to include more

details relevant to types of housework, particularly with regards to distribution of care activities

between child care on the one hand and care for the elderly and the sick on the other hand, as

well as clarifying the percentage of support activities of the total child care activities.

3- Time use surveys should be developed to guarantee precise knowledge of all forms of rural

women’s work for the market, particularly in the informal sector, for the family and in exchanged

mutual support within what is known as the companionship (Muzamalah) mechanism.

4- Time use surveys should be developed to expand the concept of unpaid housework to include

also voluntary work, a matter that will provide more precise picture of such work and its

contribution to the society’s welfare, and provide a bigger possibility to compare with similar

international data.

5- The women’s movement within the context of civil society organizations and political parties

should embark on the following

a. Community awareness of the role of unpaid housework with regards to community welfare

and the real women’s contribution in the economic activity

b. Lobby to issue needed legislative reforms to labor law

i. to guarantee “family friendly” work environment with regards to maternity and child

care leaves, and possibilities for part-time work (for both men and women)

ii. to include domestic servants and agricultural workers, as a necessary step to secure

legal and insurance protection for women working in these two fields

75

c. reform the current legal text concerning nurseries in the work facilities to include men too, so

that establishing nurseries require a minimum number of women and/or men working in the

facility.

d. Lobby to enforce the existing legal texts on establishing nurseries in facilities where a

minimum number of women work Raise working women’s awareness on the significance of

establishing and joining professional and labor trade unions to defend their rights and provide

them with the needed information and training

e. Enact constitutional texts with regards to nondiscrimination, and issuing of legislations to

prohibit and criminalize discrimination and establish necessary monitoring mechanisms

f. he Lobby to enforce implementation of minimum wages in the private sector

g. Resist any changes in the health insurance law that might lead to reduce women’s

reproductive health care or raise it cost

h. Change traditional images on women’s and men’s relation with housework and child care in

school books, drama and commercial advertisement

i. Demand that education planning should include expansion in nurseries and kinder gardens for

preschool age as well as expansion of school activities to cover weekends, official holidays

and summer holiday.

j. Improve pension of women heading households to go beyond the concept of social support to

the concept of the right to insurance protection, which the state should provide in return for

women’s contribution in the provision of establishing human capital and regeneration of the

labor power for the whole community.

k. Demand legislations with regards to sharing of matrimonial wealth between spouses, taking

into account experiences of some Islamic countries like Malaysia and some Arab countries

like Tunisia and Morocco

.

76

References

Arabic References

1- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS) and Economic Research Forum

(ERF), Panel Survey to study characteristics of labor market in the Arab Republic of Egypt, 2012.

Individual Questionnaire.

2- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Annual Statistics’ Book for Arab Republic

of Egypt. 2013

3- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Annual newsletter: Employment, wages and

work hours. 2013

4- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Annual newsletter: Employment, wages and

work hours. 2012

5- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, study on Income, Expenditure and

Consumption 2012/2013

6- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, Results of study labor force 2012

7- The Central Authority for Public Mobilization and Statistics, the Woman and Man in Egypt. 2011

8- Ministry of Planning, Egyptian economy total indicators. Annual series. Ministry of Planning, Egyptian

economy total indicators. Annual series. www.mop.gov.eg

9- Ministry of Planning, System of National Accounts. Arabic version 2008 . www.mop.gov.eg

10- Magalat Al Ahwal al Shkhsyea Law number 94/1998. Dated 5 November 1998. On the Shared estates

between spouses in Tunisia.

11- Mudawanet Al Usrah, Law 70-3/2004. Morocco. www.ugtm.ma/siteugtm/pdf/codefamille_ar.pdf

77

English References

1- A. C. Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Macmillan and Co. Limited, London, 1932 [1978].

2- Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom, New York, Anchor Books, 1999.

3- Ann Chadeau, What is Households' Non-Market Production Worth? OECD Economic Studies No. 18,

Spring 1992.

4- August Bebel, Woman under Socialism, 1879, translated by Daniel de Leon, New York, Labor News

Company, 1961.

5- Cathrine Hakim, How Can Social policy and Fiscal Policy Recognize Unpaid Family Work.

www.Ise.ac.uklnewsandMedia/news/archives/2010/08/CathrineHakimRenewal.pdf

6- Cathrine Hakim, Women, Careers and work – life preferences, British Journal of Guidance and Counseling,

August 2006.

7- Christine Delphy, Close to Home: A Materialist Analysis of Women's Oppression, University of

Massachusetts, 1984.

8- Christine M. Koogel, Globalization and Women's Paid work: Expanding Freedom? Feminist Economics, 9,

2003. www.tandf.co.uk/journals

9- Collin Clark, "The Economics of Housework", Bulletin of the Oxford University Institute of Statistics,

1958.

10- EJCL, Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, Matrimonial Property in Europe – A Link between

Sociology and Family Law, Vol. 12, December 2008. www.ejcl.org

11- Elizabeth Blackwell, Cited in William Leach, True Love and Perfect Union, New York, 1980.

12- ERF, Egypt labor force panel survey 2012, micro data.

13- Family Justice Service, Matrimonial Property – General Information, Alberta, Canada.

www.albertacourts.ab.ca/fjs/selfhelp/FJS_Property_married_12.pdf

14- Freiedraich Engels, The Origin of the Family Private Property and the State, 1884, Moscow, Progress

Publishes, 1972.

15- Gianna C. Giannelli et al., GDP and the Value of Caretaking: How Much does Europe Care? IZA,

Discussion Paper No. 5046, July 2010.

16- Gray S. Becker, A Theory of the Allocation of Time, Economic Journal, 1965.

17- ILO, Global Employment Trends for Women 2012.

18- Johnna Varjonen et al., Satellite Accounts on Household Production: Eurostat Methodology and

Experiences to apply it, Statistics Finland, Working Papers 1/2014.

19- Loree A. Primeau, A Woman's Place: Unpaid work in the Home, The American Journal of Occupational

Therapy, November 1992.

20 - Marilyn Waring, If Women Counted: New Feminist Economics, Harper Collins Publishers, Paper pack

Edition, 1990.

21- Nancy Folbre, The Unproductive Housewife: Her Evolution in Nineteenth Century Economic Thought,

Journal of women in Culture and society, the University of Chicago, 1991.

22- Norliah Ibrahim et al., The Wrights of the Wife to Claim on a Division of Matrimonial Property after

Dissolution of Marriage: Malaysian perspective, Faculty of Law, International Islamic University of Malaysia.

www.childjustice.org/index.php/component/edocoman/?task=document.viewdoc&id=226&Itemid=468

78

23- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social

Affairs, "Key Characteristics of Parental Leave Systems, May 2014

24- OECD Family Database, "Time use for work, care, and other day-to-day activities", OECD – Social

Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social affairs. www.oecd.org/social/family/database

25- OECD, Cooking, "Caring and Volunteering: Unpaid Work Around The World", OECD Social,

Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 116, 2010.

26- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social

Affairs, Typology of Children and Early Education Services, December 2010.

27- OECD family database: OECD – Social Policy Division – Directorate of Employment, Labor and Social

Affairs, Out – of – school – hours Care Services.

28- Oscar Lange, Political Economy, Volume I: General Problems, New York, Macmillan, 1963.

29- Rachel Krantz – Kent, Measuring Time Spent in Unpaid Household Work: Results from the American

Time Use Survey, Monthly Labor Review, July 2009.

30- Ragui Assaad and Caroline Kraft, The Egypt Market Panel Survey: Introducing the 2012 Round, ERF,

Working Paper 758, June 2013.

31- Rana Hendy, Rethinking Time Allocation of Egyptian Women: A Matching Analysis, Economic Research

Forum, Working Paper No. 256, 2010.

32- Report by the commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress,

www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr

33- Rosa Luxemburg, "Women's Suffrage and Class Struggle" in Dick Howard, Selected Political Writings of

Rosa Luxemburg, 1912, New York, Monthly Review Press, 1971.

34- Simon Kuznets, National Income and its Composition, New York, National Bureau of Economic

Research, 1941.

35- Statistics Sweden, Women and Men in Sweden - Facts and Figures 2010.

36- Summary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Minnesota advocates for Human Rights,

January 1996.

37- Therese Jefferson & John King, Never Intended to be a Theory about Everything: Domestic Labor in

Neoclassical & Marxian Economics, Women's Economic Policy Analysis Unit, Curtin University of

Technology, August 2001.

38- United Nations Statistics Division, Time Use Statistics to Measure Unpaid Work, Seminar on measuring

the contribution of women and men to the economy, New York, 28 February 2013.

39 - UN Commission on The Status of Women – Fifty-seventh session Review Panel, "Equal sharing of

responsibilities between men and women, including care giving in the context HIV/AIDS", 12 March 2013.

40- UNRISD, United Nations Institute for Social Development, "Gender Pattern and Value of Unpaid Work"

– findings for China's first large scale Time Use Survey, October 2012.

41- Wally Seccombe, Reflections on the Domestic Labor Debate and Prospects for Marxist-Feminist

Synthesis, 1986.

42- Wally Seccombe, The Housewife and Her Labor under Capitalism, New Left Review, 1974, No. 83.

43- World Bank, Valuing Women's Work, World Human Development Report 1992.