Notions like labour, class, economy, worker, and capitalism are often thought of as neutral concepts. However, each of these concepts is defined by gender and race dimensions.⁽²⁾ The emergence of capitalism in Africa centred on exploiting cheap (if not free) labour during the processes of colonisation and very often (if not always) this labour was divided on racial grounds. A division between paid and unpaid labour, or productive and reproductive labour, kept women in the domestic realm,performing unpaid, under-valued care and reproductive work. This status quo maintained the productive workforce (men) at the time, and reproduced the next generation of workers. Today, the world’s labour force is still divided largely along race and class lines. However, the gendered and racialised character of the class is frequently overlooked.

This CAI paper recognises that class is gendered and racialised and that there is increasing inequality in today’s globalised landscape. It provides a briefdiscussion ofthe global division of labour as related to Africa.

Division of labour

Numerous authors point out other axis upon which labour-related notions rest. Joan Acker, for example, emphasises the role of organisations, whilst Nira Yuval Davis focuses on nations. However, there is a common consensus amongst analysts that the increasing levels and speed of globalisation are further impacting the divisions of labour. In other words, as labour becomes increasingly globalised it is also becoming increasingly divided. This division is discussed in Globalization and social change: People and places in a divided worldby Diane Perrons.⁽³⁾ She considers the effects of globalisation, specifically its relationship to inequality, and questions the effectiveness of the neo-liberal era and its ability to create a fair world.

Perrons defines the division of labour as:

The expansion and deepening of capitalist relations or production in the nineteenth century, however, together with colonialism and uneven power relations between states…

…and quotes Karl Marx:

… culminated in: “a new and international division of labour...one suited to the requirements of the main industrial countries [and it] converts one part of the globe into a chiefly agricultural field of production for supplying the other part which remains a pre-eminently industrial field.”⁽⁴⁾

In this definition, Marx highlights not only the global division of labour in terms of what people do, but also the unequal flow of power and supplies. Furthermore, since Marx’s original definition, the global division of labour has evolved. Not only do some sections of the world remain agricultural ‘shopping malls’ for more developed countries, but increasingly the global division of labour is also characterised by the feminisation of employment, the creation of ‘superstar regions’ and the increasing migration of people. Perrons maintains that the global division of labour is contributing to the ever-increasing gap between rich and poor.⁽⁵⁾

The division of labour is a complex phenomenon which is primarily based on preconceived ideas, many of which have material, lived consequences. Is it merely coincidence that most care work (such as nursing, teaching etc.) is carried out by women? Is this a result of women being ‘naturally’ more inclined to care work? Is this gendered labour division further blurred by race? Or do we find particular jobs ‘better suited’ for particular races? Although contentious it is along this type of thinking (gendered and racialised) that divisions of labour have become engrained and naturalised.

Increasingly, services are being transferred from the Global South to the Global North. For example, migrant women leaving their families to look after wealthy families’ children abroad, the influx of ‘exotic’ sex workers in the world’s biggest cities, men leaving rural areas in search for work in urban areas, the masses in the service sector who maintain the lifestyle of those in the upper class brackets, or the proliferation of educated women leaving their homes to work as domestic workers in rich countries or regions. Labourers from poorer regions are attempting to move to greener pastures as a result of global inequality, unequal distribution of resources, and the non-responsibility of organisations and nations.⁽⁶⁾

It is believed that the number of African immigrants in the US has increased from 35,355 in 1960 to almost 1.5 million in 2009. Most African immigrants in the US are from East or West Africa, with the top countries of origin being Nigeria (14.1% of African immigrants), Ethiopia (9.9%), Egypt (9.3%), Ghana (7.3%), and Kenya (5.8%), South Africa (5.5%).⁽⁷⁾

The global care chain

An increasing number of migrants are women.As women in the Global North (or richer regions and countries) become more involved in paid labour, a gap forms in the domestic, unpaid, reproductive realm. The movement of women to care for other families’ children is often referred to as the ‘global care chain’ and the maintenance of global care chains is highly dependent on the global division of labour, being hierarchical in nature. Often women from poor countries (such as Zimbabwe) find themselves working in richer countries (such as South Africa) as caretakers, nannies or maids. In 2007 the domestic work sector in South Africa employed 1.2 million domestic workers making it one of the largest sectors that employ women in the country.⁽⁸⁾

Perrons suggests that “structural inequalities between countries can explain the broad directions of migration, and the specific links between countries can be explained by the size and nature of the development gap, geographical proximity and cultural and historical ties.”⁽⁹⁾ People, herein women, tend to flock from poor to richer regions/countries, for example, from Northern Africa to Europe or the Middle East. Although statistics on migration have only recently been disaggregated (so as to account for the gendered and racialised patterns of migration), it was estimated in 2009 that there were 14.9 million female migrants living within the European Union (EU), making up just over 47% of the foreign-born population. The majority of these women are African, Latin American or Asian.⁽¹⁰⁾ Additionally migrant women have outnumbered migrant men in Europe since the 1990s and in North America since as early as the 1970s.⁽¹¹⁾ It is, however, difficult to determine how many of these women are working as care takers. Furthermore the actual figures may be much higher if undocumented workers were also included in these statistics.

Nevertheless, Perrons cautions against casting women in the role of victim. Women view their move as strategicin raising the standard of living in their own and their families’ lives. However, despite the individual’s sense of agency the global care chain is “another form of surplus extraction from poor countries, in that the emotional labour which might have been devoted to their [own] children is transferred to richer parents in richer countries.”⁽¹²⁾

International inequalities

This type of labour movement is of course not restricted to care chains. It is also evident in the sex industry whereby women either ‘willingly’ or forcibly enter the sex trade in richer countries, as well as in transnational migration to superstar cities and regions, which further contributes to the growth of already ‘star-studded’ regions by hiring (and in some cases permanently removing) over-achievers and innovators from other (read: poorer) regions.⁽¹³⁾ Other examples of this type of migration are the flock of health care workers from South Africa and Nigeria to the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK), and of North African doctors migrating to France.⁽¹⁴⁾ The link between the colonial past and current migration flow trends cannot be ignored – language and historical connections do have an impact on migration destinations.

With the above discussion in mind it becomes apparent that a country like South Africa is an interesting case when it comes to migration flows.It is both a major recipient of immigrants (often from neighbouring countries), as well as a sending country (primarily to Europe and the US). South Africa therefore, has to cope with both the negative and positive consequences of the global division of labour. These consequences affect different groups of people and arguably exacerbate existing inequalities. This may be one of the reasons why South Africa is deemed one of the most unequal countries in the world.⁽¹⁵⁾ The global division of labour within and beyond Africa has become increasingly complex, as we see intra-regional, intra-state and international migration proliferating in various directions. Furthermore, it is important to note that the division of labour in all instances is marked by gender and race differentiations and more specifically, in class-based cleavages.⁽¹⁶⁾

In order to curb the adverse effects of globalisation and the division of labour, specifically,the ways in which these processes exacerbate inequality, nation-states as well as supra-national organisations may need to rethink the way in which liberalism, democracy and capitalism are implemented.This is especially truein light of increasing resistance against these systems, such as the “war on want”⁽¹⁷⁾ and the proliferation of trading and ethical codes of conduct.⁽¹⁸⁾ The varying levels of inequality both within states and the global sphere prove that different approaches can result in different outcomes.

Concluding remarks

Many African states are in their infancy, a fact that should be viewed as an advantage. They have the opportunity to mould their markets and labour forces differently and avoid entrenching inequalities. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to fight inherent inequalities within the neo-liberal era of capitalism. Many African countries are at a watershed moment where the recognition of, and steps towards combating, the global division of labour within and beyond their borders could help to combat inequality for years to come.

In this way, the ability to highlight and study global divisions of labour helps to theorise about alternatives to the current new economic order and find a way in which the mass inequalities experienced today could be curtailed in the future (even if, at times, they appear utopian). Examining such divisions of labour is not always easy, especially considering the complexity of the divisions and factors involved, for example, illegal immigrants, pursuit of better opportunities, belief in liberal endeavours, international agreements, and the fluidity and ease of movement. Using the global division of labour as the basis of a theoretical or analytical discussion is not without challenges but it is a valuable concept that can be used to both understand and highlight the inequalities within and between countries on a local, regional and global scale.

Discussions surrounding social democracy and its success in some countries (such as Sweden), should be further explored; poorer states (idealistically) should invest in ways of keeping talent within their borders. More pressure should be put on nation-states that find (or encourage) this flow into their countries to care for and protect migrants. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs)should continue to monitor the situation and the media act as whistle blowers for national and corporate non-responsibility. Although NGOs may be ‘subservient’ to the state (or states), their power to raise awareness is invaluable and also linked to the proliferation of information and communication technologies (ICTs) which help to condense time and space.Finally, recognising that these class divisions are intrinsically gendered and racialisedwill allow us to recognise some of the flaws in the current neo-liberal era.

NOTES:

(1) Contact Claudia Forster-Towne through Consultancy Africa Intelligence’s Rights in Focus Unit (rights.focus@consultancyafrica.com).
(2) Acker, J., 2006. Class questions and feminist answers. Rowman& Littlefield Publishers: USA. For more on this discussion, see chapters 1 and 2.
(3) Perrons, D., 2004. Globalisation and social change: People and places in a divided world.Routledge: USA & Canada.
(4)Ibid., p.64.
(5)Ibid., p.68.
(6)Ibid., pp.103-112.
(7) Mcabe, K., 2011. ‘African immigrants in the United States’, Migration Information Source, www.migrationinformation.org.
(8) GFMD, 2011.‘Domestic workers at the interface of migration & development: Action to expand good practice’, www.gfmd.org.
(9) Perrons, D., 2004. Globalisation and social change: People and places in a divided world.Routledge: USA & Canada, p.107.
(10) Kontos, M., 2011. ‘Between integration & exclusion: migrant women in European labour markets’, Migration Information Source, www.migrationinformation.org.
(11) Zlotnik, H. 2003, ‘The global dimensions of female migration’, Migration Information Source, www.migrationinformation.org.
(12) Perrons, D., 2004. Globalisation and social change: People and places in a divided world.Routledge: USA & Canada, p.108.
(13)Ibid., pp.109-225.
(14) Connell, J., et al., 2007. Sub-Saharan Africa: Beyond the health worker migration crisis?Social Science & Medicine, 64, pp.1876-1891, http://www.sciencedirect.com.
(15) Anon., ‘Country comparison: Distribution of family income - Gini index’, Central Intelligence Agency: The World Factbook,https://www.cia.gov.
(16) Perrons, D., 2004. Globalisation and social change: People and places in a divided world.Routledge: USA & Canada, p.35.
(17)Ibid., p.254.
(18)Ibid., pp.307-313.

Written by Claudia Forster-Towne ⁽¹⁾