Rural households, livelihood strategies and reproductive labour in the era of neoliberal restructuring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study investigates factors that facilitate and constrain the redistribution of social reproductive responsibilities between heterosexual spouses in rural Ontario communities in the context of neoliberal restructuring. Impacts of neoliberal restructuring on gender divisions of reproductive labour are examined through livelihood strategies of couples and through spouses' relative attachments to the labour market. In order to determine whether potential changes in the gender division of reproductive labour are brought about by neoliberal restructuring or by other factors, this study also considers the influence of age, education, childcare demands and spouses' views about domestic gender roles on the division of labour. This study is mostly based on separate in-depth interviews with heterosexual couples from Arnprior and Mount Forest, two rural Ontario manufacturing dependent towns. Social reproduction requires allocation of resources and division of responsibilities. In developed capitalist economies, the state, the labour market, and the family/household are key players in this process (Lewis, 1992; Orloff, 1993). Resource allocation and sharing of reproductive responsibilities are time specific. They change in response to changes in the regime of capital accumulation (Fudge and Cossman, 2002; Cameron, 2006). The findings of this study suggest that employment changes due to neoliberal restructuring experienced by many Arnprior and Mount Forest couples between 1993 and 2003 led to an increased number of couples with one or both income earners generating multiple incomes. While restructuring creates such forms of flexible work as part-time and part-year, women's childcare responsibilities prescribed to them by the traditional gender ideology, ensure women's concentration in flexible employment. A single male earner livelihood strategy utilised by many families with young children almost inevitably leads to the traditional gender division of labour. However, women's comparable or more privileged standing in the labour market vis-a?-vis their husbands has the potential to facilitate the re-distribution of social reproductive work. Changes towards a more equitable gender division of reproductive labour are contingent upon views that spouses hold about appropriate gender roles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".