My experience in West Africa shows that feminism and neoliberalism are definitely in conflict.
For a moment, imagine a vast, rich, and diverse ecosystem, say savannah-like Senegal, where different ecosystems coexist, symbolising the diversity of individuals and communities in society. Feminism strives to ensure that every part of this savannah—every grass, plant, tree, and animal—has access to the essentials of life: sunlight, water, and space, promoting equality and flourishing for all.
Neoliberalism, however, is like an invasive species introduced into the savannah. It promises growth and vitality, much like an aggressive plant or grass that initially seems to increase the ecosystem's productivity. This invasive species, representative of neoliberal policies, spread rapidly, consuming water and nutrients and encroaching on the space of native plants and animals.
As this invasive species dominates, it upsets the balance of the savannah, benefiting only those who can compete or coexist with it, much as neoliberalism benefits the most adaptable or resourceful entities in society, concentrating wealth and leaving the vulnerable with less.
In a recent article that has drawn my keen interest and reflection, Max Lawson asks whether it is possible to be both a neoliberal and a feminist. This article has made me reflect on the progressiveness of feminism and invasiveness of neoliberalism in Africa context, based on what I have witnessed in my home country of Mali and in West Africa. Is it possible to be a neoliberal Feminist? My answer is an emphatic no. The impact of neoliberalism in Africa is multifaceted. It remains a hot topic of debate among economists, political scientists, and policymakers.
Four ways neoliberalism is holding Africa back.
This scenario illustrates how the fundamental disconnect between 'neoliberal' and 'feminist' ideologies compromises the goal of communal prosperity through policies that prioritise growth at the expense of equity and diversity. To put this scenario in perspective, I’ll highlight four significant ones, all of which I have witnessed in my home country of Mali and elsewhere in West Africa:
Economic growth and structural adjustment: Many African countries adopted neo-liberal policies encouraged by international financial institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank through structural adjustment programmes in the 1980s and 1990s. These policies aimed to stimulate economic growth through liberalisation, reduction of government spending and greater private-sector involvement. While few countries experienced periods of economic growth and increased foreign investment, most African countries did not see the benefit. Even for those who experienced a short period of economic growth, benefits mainly accrued to the upper echelon as everyone else was left out, exacerbating inequality.
Privatisation of public services: Neoliberalism's push for privatisation of state-owned enterprises and cuts in public spending changed the landscape of public service provision. Neoliberalism sees the public sector as an inefficient and ineffective economic actor. This thinking has resulted in the dramatic rise in the profit-driven privatisation of essential services, escalating costs and reduced access to basic services such as health, education, and water for the poor, impacting women and girls disproportionately.
Inequality and social impact: Implementing neo-liberal policies has led to a widening income gap in many African countries. Africa is the second-most unequal region in the world and harbours 30 of the most unequal countries globally. The emphasis on market-driven growth has overwhelmingly benefited the richest, while cuts in social spending and subsidies have disproportionately affected the impoverished and vulnerable, leading to the widening of the gap between the rich and poor and exacerbating poverty in many countries.
Agriculture and rural development: Liberalising agricultural markets under neo-liberal agendas exposed African farmers to intense global competition. Market liberalisation hammered the last nail in the coffin of the infant agricultural industries, in the process destroying jobs and industrialisation. While this opened new export opportunities for some, it has negatively affected the most who can't compete with imports, undermining local agriculture in certain areas and affecting rural livelihoods. The emphasis on cash crop farming has led to the neglect of small-holder food-crop farmers. The effect is the ever-rising hunger in the region and rising food import bills.
The IMF, Ms. Lagarde's former employer, and the World Bank Group designed, advocated, and implemented these policies. After failing terribly, they admitted that the patient had been misdiagnosed and given the wrong medicine. Sadly, the two continue to highlight macroeconomic indicators as evidence of growth and prosperity, overshadowing the reality that such 'prosperity' is often concentrated in the hands of a few, thereby increasing poverty and inequality. With countries in Africa crushed by debt, they are again calling for the same menu of spending cuts and austerity across the continent as we speak that will only drive-up inequality further.
As the two global institutions gather the world this week in Washington D.C for the spring meetings, the harmful effect of neoliberal policies on the realisation of gender equality should be at the top of the agenda. Feminists like Bhumika are doing invaluable work in countering the narrative about neoliberalism. The IMF and the World Bank should stop paying lip service, listen to the and do the right thing.
END
Author: Adama Coulibaly, Global Programs Director, Oxfam International.
Catch our latest episode ‘Is it possible to be a Neoliberal Feminist’ with Bhumika Muchhala here.
Always remember to share and follow us on X and connect with us on LinkedIn.