- Austen, S., 2018, “Gender and Risk-Taking: Economics, Evidence, and Why the Answer Matters“, Feminist Economics, Vol 24(4): 162-166
- A Mavisakalyan and Y. Tarverdi, 2019. “Gender and climate change: Do female parliamentarians make a difference?”, European Journal of Political Economy Vol 15(3): 281-304
- Austen S. 2019. “Gender Equality in Later Life”, in Gu D. and Dupre M. (eds) Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging. Springer, Cham
- Austen, S. E., and T. Jefferson, 2019.“Crossing the Great Divide: Ostrom’s Coproduction and the Economics of Aged Care”Feminist Economics 25 (3): 48-6.
- National Foundation for Australian Women 2018, A Gender Lens – Budget 2019-2020, Canberra
- Monica Costa and Marian Sawer, 2019. “A thorny path to a more inclusive discipline”, in Sawer, Marian and Baker, in Kerryn (Eds.) Gender Innovation in Political Science: New Norms, New Knowledge, Palgrave Macmillan
- Austen, S. E., and A. Mavisakalyan, 2018.“Gender gaps in long-term earnings and retirement wealth: The effects of education and parenthood.” Journal of Industrial Relations. Sage Publications Ltd.
- Austen, S. E., and A. Mavisakalyan, 2018.“Constitutions and the Political Agency of Women: A Cross-Country Study,” in MacKinnon, C. (ed) Gender in Constitutional Law, Edward Elgar Publishing, UK.
- National Foundation for Australian Women 2018, A Gender Lens – Budget 2018-19, Canberra
- Costa, M, Austen, S. and R. Sharp, 2018 “A strategy to understand the nexus between gender analysis and policy”, WiSER working paper series, Australia
- Austen, S. and R. Sharp, 2018 “Budgeting for women’s rights in retirement”, in Stewart, M. (ed) Tax, Social Policy and Gender: Rethinking Equality and Efficiency, ANU Press, Australia.
- Hodgson, H. and K. Sadiq, 2018 “Gender equality and a rights based approach to tax reform”, in Stewart, M. (ed) Tax, Social Policy and Gender: Rethinking Equality and Efficiency, ANU Press, Australia
- Austen, S. (2018) “Labor Processes and Outcomes: An Institutional-Heterodox Framework” in Routledge Handbook of Heterodox Economics, edited by Tae-Hee Jo, Lynne Chester, and Carlo D’Ippoliti, Routledge, Chapter 25.
This chapter reviews recent developments in institutional economics that are potentially relevant to the future direction of studies of labor processes and outcomes. A key focus is the Institutional Analysis and Design (IAD) framework, which was devised by Elinor Ostrom and her colleagues to assist in the development of theories of human behaviour in a diverse range of situations. Whilst the majority of previous discussions of Ostrom’s work have focused on her analysis of common pool environmental resources, this chapter examines the potential to make use of the IAD framework to guide the development of institutional-heterodox theories and empirical analyses of labor situations.
- Costa, M (2018) “Gender responsive budgeting in fragile states: The case of Timor-Leste”, Oxford: Routledge Publishing.
- Do, C., H. Hodgson, and N. Wilson-Rogers. 2017. “The tax on feminine hygiene products: Is this reasonable policy?.” Australian Tax Forum 32(3): 521-541.
- Jefferson, T., Austen, S., Ong, R. and M. Haffner, 2017. “Housing Equity Withdrawal: Perceptions of Obstacles among Older Australian Home Owners and associated Service Providers.” Journal of Social Policy 46(3):623-643
- National Foundation for Australian Women 2017, A Gender Lens – Budget 2017-18, Canberra
- The Work + Family Policy Roundtable, Submission to the Inquiry by the Senate Finance and Public Administration References Committee into gender segregation in the workplace and its impact on women’s economic equality
- Austen, S. (2017) “Feminist Economics for Smart Behavioural Economists”, in Behavioural Economics with Smart People: Rational Decision-Making within the Bounds of Reason, edited by Morris Altman, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Chapter 10.
Some prominent feminist economists have already identified the strategic potential to link new institutional economics, which is Nobel Laureate Elinor Ostrom’s field, with feminist theory. Concepts such as endogenous tastes and reciprocity, which feature in new institutional (and smart behavioural) analysis can be linked to feminist economic arguments about the gendered nature of economic behaviour. However, many feminist economists contest other core concepts of new institutional and smart behavioural economics, such as the notion of boundedly rational economic agents, emphasising instead the emotional and subjective aspects of decision-making. Acknowledging these tensions, this chapter explores the potential connections between feminist, smart behavioural and new institutional economics. It draws on Ostrom’s IAD framework to identify key features of feminist economics, before turning to a discussion of the key research topics where the interests of feminist and smart behavioural economics appear to intersect. These include the presence (or otherwise) of differences in the preferences and behaviour of men and women. The issue of (possible) differences in risk aversion is discussed in some detail, while the issue of altruistic preferences is also considered. The chapter concludes with a summary of the key themes of feminist economics and some recommendations for smart behavioural economic research.
- Siobhan Austen, Rhonda Sharp, Therese Jefferson and Rachel Ong, 2017, “Missing mature women in Australia’s aged care sector”, in Burke, R. and Calvano, L., The Sandwich Generation: Caring for Oneself and Others at Home and at Work, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
- Costa, M and Sharp, R. (2017) ‘Budgetary policy, gender equality and the politics of change’ in Niner, S. (ed) Women and the politics of gender in post-conflict Timor-Leste, Women in Asia Series, Oxford: Routledge Publishing
- Austen, S. E., and A. Mavisakalyan, 2016.“Constitutions and the Political Agency of Women: A Cross-Country Study.”Feminist Economics 22 (1): 183-210
- Austen, Siobhan, Therese Jefferson, Gill Lewin, Rachel Ong and Rhonda Sharp, 2016 “Work ability, age and the intention to leave age care work” Australian Journal of Ageing 35(1):18-22.
- Austen, Siobhan, Therese Jefferson, Gill Lewin, Rachel Ong and Rhonda Sharp, 2016 “Recognition: Applications in aged care work” Cambridge Journal of Economics Advance 40(4): 1037-1054.
- Capezio, A., and A. Mavisakalyan, 2016 “Women in the boardroom and fraud: Evidence from Australia.”Australian Journal of Management 34. In press.
- Austen, Siobhan, 2016 “Gender Issues in an Ageing Society” Australian Economic Review 49 (4): 494-502
- Costa, M. (2016) ‘Gender-Focused Institutions in International Parliamentary Bodies: The Case of the Women’s Caucus of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Portuguese-Speaking Countries’, Parliamentary Affairs
- The Work + Family Policy Roundtable, Work, Care & Family Policies – Election Benchmarks 2016, The Women + Work Research Group, Sydney
- Therese Jefferson, Siobhan Austen, Rhonda Sharp, Rachel Ong, Valerie Adams and Gill Lewin, 2016 “A mixed methods approach to investigating the employment decisions of aged care workers in Australia”, in Lee, F. and Cronin, B., Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Heterodox Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
This chapter describes the development and implementation of a mixed methods research project that was designed to investigate the characteristics and experience of women aged 45 and over working in the Australian aged care sector. The key issue of interest is whether these workers planned to remain in or leave employment in the sector. This study utilises an embedded mixed methods framework of enquiry, utilising secondary data from a large national survey, organisational employment data, purposefully collected survey data and semi structured interview data collection and analysis. This framework captures the potential of quantitative data to identify national patterns of mature age women’s employment, the employment decisions made by aged care workers at an organisational level and patterns of employment exit and retention by aged care workers at an industry level. Individual qualitative data provides insights into the experiences of the aged care workers within specific institutional contexts.
- National Foundation for Australian Women 2016, A Gender Lens – Budget 2016-17, Canberra
- Austen, S. E., R. Sharp, and H. Hodgson, 2015.“Gender impact analysis and the taxation of retirement savings in Australia.”Australian Tax Forum 30 (4): 763-781.
- Austen, Siobhan and Therese Jefferson (2015) “Economic analysis, ideology and the public sphere: insights from Australia’s equal remuneration hearings” Cambridge Journal of Economics. For a special edition on ‘Equal Pay: Fair Pay? A Forty-year Perspective’. 39(2): 405-419.
- Austen, Siobhan, Therese Jefferson, Gill Lewin, Rachel Ong and Rhonda Sharp, 2015 “Care roles and the effect of economic circumstance” Journal of Industrial Relations. 57 (5): pp. 665-685.
- Mavisakalyan, A. 2015.“Gender in Language and Gender in Employment.”Oxford Development Studies 43 (4): 403-424.
- Senate Standing Committees on Economics 2015 ‘Achieving economic security for women in retirement’, Canberra
WiSER submission to the Senate Inquiry into Economic Security for Women in Retirement