Economic Citizenship: Neoliberal Paradoxes of Empowerment focuses on a particular arena of neoliberal cultural production: the social economy. The social economy can be understood as a wide range of organizations that come together for a stated mutual or cooperative good. For Amalia Saʾar, the Israeli social economy brings together business tycoons, social-service professionals, state functionaries, grassroots activists, and women from disempowered backgrounds. A central paradox the book addresses is between economic-empowerment projects and their discourse of individual self-sufficiency, on the one hand, and the more radical commitment to social change purported by many of the targeted women, on the other. This paradox can be found in much of the literature on women’s empowerment programs, as well as literature on gender and development more broadly. Although these programs claim to alleviate poverty, empower women, and contribute to economic growth, empirical research shows that alongside potential benefits, these programs tend to entrench...
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
Book Review|
March 01 2020
Economic Citizenship: Neoliberal Paradoxes of Empowerment
Economic Citizenship: Neoliberal Paradoxes of Empowerment
. Saʾar, Amalia. Oxford
: Berghahn
, 2016
. 262 pages. isbn 9781785331794
.
Sara Salem
Sara Salem
SARA SALEM is assistant professor in sociology at the London School of Economics. She is particularly interested in questions of traveling theory, postcolonial/anticolonial nationalism, and feminist theory. She has published articles on Angela Davis in Egypt in Signs; on Frantz Fanon and Egypt’s postcolonial state in Interventions: A Journal of Postcolonial Studies; and on haunted histories and Egypt’s anticolonial project in Middle East Critique. Contact: [email protected].
Search for other works by this author on:
Journal of Middle East Women's Studies (2020) 16 (1): 66–68.
Citation
Sara Salem; Economic Citizenship: Neoliberal Paradoxes of Empowerment. Journal of Middle East Women's Studies 1 March 2020; 16 (1): 66–68. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15525864-8016519
Download citation file:
Advertisement
85
Views