Periodic Reporting for period 1 - KnowingDOM (Law, Economy and Seeing Woman’s Work: Knowledge Production and the ILO’s Domestic Workers Convention in Global Migration Governance)
Periodo di rendicontazione: 2022-10-01 al 2024-09-30
This project therefore investigates how various actors engage with an international organization in making knowledge claims about domestic work. It will seek to primarily illustrate the contingency of these claims, to show that the process by which knowledge about domestic work is created is highly contentious - as actors compete over definition of terms, scope, jurisdiction, etc. By investigating how ‘science’, or the authoritative production of knowledge claims, informs politics and vice versa. More broadly, this project draws from the sociality of knowledge production in feminist interventions in science and technology studies that attend to different sources of epistemic authority, including voices ‘from below’.
The project has four major objectives:
1. Investigate the discourses which justified the need for standard-setting treaty (C189) and reasons given for or against ratification
2. Investigate the calls for action and activities related to the ratification or rejection of C189
3. Identify what instruments, tools and data techniques the ILO created to understand the phenomenon of domestic work at a large scale
4. Examine how know-how diffuses to and from the ILO and regional actors (notably in the European Union)
One journal article has so far been published and two other articles are currently under review. A book manuscript has also been submitted for publishing under IMISCOE-Springer. The manuscript is being revised after reviews were received in November 2024. Other deliverables include a podcast, a roundtable discussion and a policy brief. The Researcher has also engaged in numerous communication and dissemination activities.
The feminist science studies approach taken up by KnowingDOM opens up new avenues of inquiry into the understanding of domestic work by centring how the push for its recognition as “work” in the context of labour standard-setting created demand for knowledge production in development studies, feminist political economy and labour statistics, to name a few. At the same time, this approach has been sensitive to the omissions and exclusions of the sector throughout the history of the ILO’s standard-setting. As such, this concrete case demonstrates how knowledge production, even as it unfolds in the procedural, and highly technical setting of the ILO, is nonetheless imbued by the normative commitment to valorise the sector and those who perform domestic tasks.
Increasingly the explanation that there was something about its “nature” that made it incompatible with standard employment relationships became untenable. The conceptual solution, which later became a practical rallying cry for advocates in the run-up to the International Labour Convention in 2010 and 2011, was that it is work that is “work like any other, and work like no other”. This insisted on the compatibility of domestic work and standard employment norms as well as the need for specific regulation given its specificity – the household as place of employment.
Given the organisational design and dynamics of the ILO, this project sees it as a boundary organisation. A boundary organisation is a space in which “science and nonscience” can interact, that is, experts and laypersons, producing practical know-how. The demand for conceptual innovations and knowledge products comes from the ILO’s constituencies in the context of standard-setting.