ECONOMICS & FGM
ECONOMICS & FGM
In February 2020 the CoP held a discussion during which we explored the links between Economy and FGM.
We found that Economic issues can be considered both in terms of causes and in terms of consequences of FGM.
First, we considered socio-economic factors such as poverty, the level of education and women’s economic and social independence as potential driving forces of FGM. As we know, FGM is linked to power relations between men and women, the gendered status of women and girls in a given society as well as their level of autonomy and action. Power, of course, is profoundly linked to economic development and property law. With this in mind, we discussed
- Issues around how women’s socio-economic situation, their opportunities in terms of employment and education, and the level of poverty, are linked to FGM.
- Whether economic development can foster the abandonment of FGM.
Moreover, considering the economic and social costs of FGM is also crucial. Indeed, FGM has important social and medical costs, as shown in WHO’s 2010 study on “Obstetric costs of female genital mutilation in six African countries”. A new WHO FGM cost calculation tool was presented on February 6th 2020, international day against FGM.
In this section, the following questions were addressed by the members:
- Do you see a relationship between standard of living, poverty, education rate of girls, economic autonomy of women – and FGM, in your country ?
- Do you have examples of women’s empowerment projects that have had a positive effect on the prevalence rate of FGM?
- Do you have information on the cost of FGM in your country? How do you use this information in your work?
- Ellen Gruenbaum, 2001, The Female Circumcision Controversy: An Anthropological Perspective, Access here
- End-FGM Network, 2020, Factsheet 4 : The Development Costs, Access here
- Finke E., 2006, Genital mutilation as an expression of power structures: ending FGM through education, empowerment of women and removal of taboos, Access here
- Gruenbaum E., 2001, The Female Circumcision Controversy: An Anthropological Perspective, Access here
- Les discussions de la CoP-MGF, 2020, Note thématique “Mainstreaming FGM” de la CoP-FGM, Access here
- OMS, 2008, Eliminer les mutilations sexuelles féminines : déclaration inter institutions HCDH, OMS, ONUSIDA, PNUD, UNCEA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNIFEM, Access here
- Mediterranean Institute of Gender Studies (Institut méditerranéen des études de genre, M.I.G.S.)., 2015, Prise de position du réseau EndFGM: Considérer les MGF comme une question de genre et de développement, Access here
- Mpinga E.K., Macias A., Hasselgard-Rowe J. et al. , 2016, Female genital mutilation: a systematic review of research on its economic and social impacts across four decades, Access here
- Population Reference Bureau, 2013, Ending female genital mutilation/cutting: lessons from a decade of progress, 2013., Access here
- Shell-Duncan B., Reshma N. and Feldman-Jacobs C., 2016, A state-of-the-art synthesis on female genital mutilation/cutting: What do we know now?, Access here
- UNICEF, 2013, Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: a statistical overview and exploration of the dynamics of change, Access here
- UNFPA-UNICEF, 2015, Mesurer les progrès, encourager les changements, Access here
- UN Women, 2017, Rural women explore new solutions to counter customs and poverty driving FGM crisis, Access here
- UN Women, 2016, Stepping out of the Boma: Maasai women of Tanzania take charge of their own lives and livelihood, Access here
- UN Women Egypt, 2019, Forces for change: Improving the lives of women in Egypt, Access here
- UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme on FGM, Annual Report 2018 : Accelerating Change, Published in August 2019, Access here
- WHO, Bishai D., Bonnenfant Y. T., Darwish M., Adam T., Bathija H., Johansen, E., 2010, FGM Cost Study Group of World Health Organization (2010). “Estimating the obstetric costs of female genital mutilation in six African countries, Access here
- WHO, 2008, Eliminer les mutilations sexuelles féminines : déclaration interinstitutions HCDH, OMS, ONUSIDA, PNUD, UNCEA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNIFEM, Access here
Economics & FGM How to act on the economic level? In order to act on economic factors, FGM must no longer be considered as a criterion of eligibility for marriage, and marriage must no longer be seen as necessary to ensure the material survival and social...
Economics & FGM In Sierra Leone: abandonning FGM to save money In “Seeking to save money, Sierra Leone village gives up FGM”, Nellie Peyton presents the special case of the Thawuya village (Sierra Leone) where economic costs surrounding the practice of FGM...
Economics & FGM WHO’s costs calculation tool On February 6th 2020 – the International Day Against FGM- the WHO’s cost calculation tool was launched in Brussels. It is available online following this link: https://srhr.org/fgmcost/cost-calculator/ The WHO...
Economics & FGM Assessing economic and societal costs Research on the consequences and economic drivers of FGM is rare and an increase in focus on these areas would clearly be beneficial. Most of the current research focuses on medical care, primarily on...
Economics & FGM Socio-economic subordination and FGM Studies have revealed that the socio-economic subordination of women conditions the perpetuation of the practice of FGM (Mediterranean Institute of Gender Studies, 2015), and that the more women exercise...