Re-distribution matters – Women's unpaid work and new household technologies

Women’s unpaid work is one of the main reasons for gender inequality in our societies. This unpaid work mainly refers to reproductive work including household work like cleaning and cooking as well as care work like childcare and caring for the sick and elderly. Oxfam’s estimations of the value of care work reveal its importance: “When valued at minimum wage this would represent a contribution to the global economy of at least $10.8 trillion a year, more than three times the size of the global tech industry”. Unsurprisingly, Oxfam refers to care work as “the ‘hidden engine’ that keeps the wheels of our economies, businesses and societies turning”. Similarly, the ILO remarks based on data from 64 countries “that 16.4 billion hours per day are spent in unpaid care work – the equivalent to 2 billion people working eight hours per day with no remuneration. Were such services to be valued on the basis of an hourly minimum wage, they would amount to 9% of global GDP or US$ 11 trillion (purchasing power parity in 2011)”.

Despite their significance, reproductive work and care work do not receive the appreciation they deserve, neither in the household nor in society. The distribution of reproductive work remains highly gendered in both the Global South and Global North. Oxfam for instance finds that “Women and girls undertake more than three-quarters of unpaid care work in the world and make up two-thirds of the paid care workforce”. Statistics for Italy from the European Institute for Gender Equality reveal that “women are four times more likely (81%) than men (20%) to spend at least an hour a day cooking and doing housework; more women (34%) than men (24%) have daily caregiving responsibilities of one hour or more” and among couples with children, “81% of women and 66% of men spend time on daily caregiving tasks”. The pandemic has increased the amount of unpaid work but it has also shown its significance for the world.

It may be too early to assess whether the benefits of digitalization outweigh its risks as the impact of social change depends on many factors, above all on the extent to which people can participate in and shape this change. Yet, from a gender perspective, a fairer society via digitalization is possible if at the same time a fairer distribution of reproductive work is achieved. A question that emerges is thus if and how the new household technologies impact the distribution of reproductive work between the sexes.

Robotics and the Internet of Things have already found application in elderly care during the last decades. Freelance science writer from Massachusetts Neil Savage provides an overview of how robots that are used in retirement homes and hospitals have proven themselves useful in feeding, lifting, cleaning and dressing. They can also be helpful in giving medication or reminding patients to take their medicine even though researchers emphasize that such activities must be monitored by human beings for ethical and legal reasons.

Moreover, with young children and in retirement homes robots can also engage in social interactions and entertainment activities like “calling bingo and leading a sing-along, freeing up staff to attend to residents’ individual needs”. Journalist Alex Whiting writes that “in the not-too-distant future, elderly people who live alone may be reminded to take their medicine, have books read to them, and be offered a metaphorical, shoulder to cry on – by a robot”. Moreover, robots can support the mobility as well as the autonomy of the disabled and elderly, hence they can also increase people’s self-esteem and promote their mental health.

What can we expect from new household technologies with respect to reproductive work? Are they intended to re-distribute the work between the sexes or are they there to lift women’s work burden and delegate the work in what is allegedly their domain to robots? It is obvious that to attain gender equality the re-distribution of this work and equal participation of men in reproductive work is necessary. However, as critical voices point out, in their current state, the re-distribution of household work seems very unlikely. One of the reasons is that too few women work in the technology sector.

However, there is more to do than encourage women to take up jobs in the technology sector. The digital revolution must be accompanied by a cultural revolution and by changes in people’s mindsets. Women need to be relieved from the unpaid work burden. This is possible if first women possess the necessary skills and can free themselves from stereotypes that associate masculinity with technology. Second, an equal male participation in the household and care work is necessary. Third, in order to challenge gender stereotypes, civil society, the private sector, and the government should work together via educational campaigns, trainings and even advertisements. Otherwise, in the digital era just like in preceding eras, the unequal division of labour in the household will continue to be one of the main obstacles to gender equality.