1. Introduction
The return of the debt in most countries of the Global South while a crisis of social reproduction and care is deepening has evidenced the need of feminist economics to address the analysis of the connections between both processes; plus the challenges related to the climate crisis, with differential impacts on women and historically unprotected groups, and the effects of the war between Russia and Ukraine on the prices of food and energy at a global level, which have also affected the increase of the interest rate to control inflation, which has resulted in the increase of the cost of debt.
Indebtedness and its resulting crises had significant consequences in the past for the life of people, even putting survival and welfare at risk during the whole vital cycle. Women were particularly affected by this phenomenon because they are at a disadvantage in almost any field, mainly as to the unpaid work resulting from the gender division of work.
This chapter analyses debt sustainability in the light of the assumptions of feminist economics. Countries that receive financing and technical advice from financial agencies, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB), have driven analysis frameworks and tools for debt management that prioritize capital flows and their return in the name of financial and macroeconomic stability over human rights and the wellbeing of people.
From the view of feminist economics, this represents a contradiction with the goals of economic performance, whose main concern should be to maintain and reproduce life. Although the calculation of debt sustainability
This chapter presents a critical look at the debt sustainability analysis from feminist economics. Following this introduction, the second section presents the analytical categories of feminist economics that are useful for this debt analysis. The third section presents the theoretical structure of the economic orthodoxy to address debt sustainability and its consequences for the population and particularly for women. Finally, the last section presents the conclusions.
2. Life sustainability: feminist economics
‘Life sustainability is understood as a historical process of social reproduction, a complex, dynamic, and multidimensional process of need fulfilment in continuous adaptation of individual identities and social relations’ (Carrasco, Borderías and Torns, 2011: 60). According to Bosch, Carrasco, and Grau (2005: 2), this process
not only refers to the actual possibility that life continues – in human, social, and ecological terms –, but to the fact that such process implies developing acceptable life levels, life standards, or life quality for all the population. This sustainability then implies a harmonic relation between humanity and nature, and between sisters and brothers.
In the idea of ‘sustainability’, feminist economics is part of the criticism to the economic orthodoxy, the use of analytical categories that characterizes this approach to analyze the condition of women, the intersectional look, and the multidisciplinary wealth for its interrelation with other disciplines, such as the environmental ones.
The emphasis put on maintaining life can be explicitly found in the classical authors of economics, such as Adam Smith, David Ricardo and even Karl Marx, who propose the need of a subsistence salary that includes the costs of maintaining life considering social needs.
Smith recognizes the role of women in social reproduction through the care and upbringing of children that then will be ‘productive’ workers and will contribute to the ‘wealth of nations’. This author also refers to the existence of needs that arise from culture and customs, so they go beyond biological reproduction. This is not a minor aspect as it has consequences for the subsistence salary in the microeconomic field and, at a macroeconomic level, production should provide the ‘necessary and convenient’ things for life.
However, classical authors do not refer to the value of social reproduction work or include in their analysis the existence of inequalities between men
With the arrival of the neoclassical school, which was the prevailing paradigm both among scholars and in the international economic agencies during the 20th century, social reproduction work disappears from the theoretical structure of the economic sciences. This fact invisibilizes an important proportion of the effort made to guarantee the economic results generally measured by the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), national revenue or wealth in an economy.
The focus of neoclassical or marginalist scholars became the mechanism to determine efficiency prices through the balance between supply and demand. With this approach, social relations and needs disappear, and any possibility to include social reproduction work is lost.
This doctrine divides the economic activity in dichotomic areas – public/private fields, market/family, productive/reproductive work – that do not connect with each other; the first ones are the object of study, where the monetized economy prevails.
The private/family/reproductive areas are kept subordinated and their content is undervalued. When they are considered, the analysis uses the same assumptions and theories as in the private sector; therefore, it does not recognize or explain the problems that affect women or inequalities.
The theorem of the ‘representative economic agent’ or ‘homo economicus’, on which the neoclassical structure is based and that aims at explaining market relations, is also assumed in the family with some changes that recognize the existence of different conducts; however, in essence the idea of profit maximization remains. For instance, women ‘choose’ combinations of time to work and leisure, goods and services based on prices and opportunity costs defined in the market. The inequalities resulting from the gender division of work or the inequalities generated by the market and that are not explained by supply and demand are not considered, against the definitions of neoclassical theories.
This way, spaces, activities, economic flows and production where women participate are invisibilized. The work considered is the one that goes through the market and is paid.
The existence of a ‘representative’ agent whose main interest is to optimize her budget restriction hides inequalities and the consideration of social needs. Even though this representative agent is supposed to have neutral characteristics in terms of gender, she actually takes the role socially assigned to men as providers in a family, with a woman devoted to domestic and unpaid work.
At a macroeconomic level, adding the maximization of profits (consumption) and benefits (production) generates income flows that ignore the effect of unpaid (domestic and care) work that happens in households
Feminist economics, with the contributions of Antonella Picchio, Nancy Folbre, Cristina Carrasco and Susan Himmelweit, among other economists, incorporates social reproduction work, extending the income flow as the amount of work included in economic activities increases. The working population includes those who perform unpaid work, regardless of what they do in the labour market or if they receive remuneration, and the concept of welfare is expanded to go beyond education and health – components of human capital for the neoclassical school – and to include daily care.
With the incorporation of social reproduction in the theoretical structure, feminist economics reshapes the microeconomic and macroeconomic analysis, forcing the redefinition of the analytical and indicator categories, and the epistemological and methodological transformations of economics. This alternative approach enables us to understand reality and influence on proposals of change that contribute to an emancipatory economy for women.
Not only does feminist economics challenge the assumptions of the ‘representative economic agent’ that do not distinguish differences between men and women, but it also assumes the existence of differences among women, many of which become inequalities when social class, ethnicity, sexual orientation and nationality, among others, are considered. One example is domestic and care work.
The hiring of these services by persons or households is marked by inequalities among women. Migrant, Black and rural women are the ones hired for these occupations, generally with lower salaries and in precarious conditions, both in their own communities or countries and when they participate in the so-called global chains of care.
In this respect, the idea of ‘accumulation for dispossession’ proposed by David Harvey (2005), to which Silvia Federici (2010) adds dispossession ‘of the reproduction work’, helps to understand the process by which capitalism maintenance is supported with the appropriation of the free work of women both within countries and among them.
Country indebtedness, especially in Latin America, took place to guarantee growth models that mainly benefited private capital. The lack of interest in benefiting work and salaries is reflected in the unequal access to assets, such as land, forests or water, the appropriation of retirement funds, the precariousness of the labour market and the persistence of poverty, the subordination conditions of women, the migrations generated due to the removal of farmers and indigenous people from their original territories, and unfair tax structures.
In debt crises, these problems are deepened and other problems are added, such as the liberalization of markets or the privatization of public or common
The gender division of work implies not only exclusion from the labour market or inclusion with many obstacles, but also a subordinated social position due to the devaluation of unpaid work.
According to Federici (2010), women were forced to chronic poverty, economic dependency and their invisibility as workers, while for male workers, their product, the labour force, was devalued (Federici, 2010).
Thus ‘the invisibility of housework hides the secret of all capitalist life: the source of social surplus – unwaged labor – must be degraded, naturalized, made into a marginal aspect of the system’ (Caffentzis, 1999: 14).
The divergent paths of life sustainability and debt sustainability are understood by analyzing the capital–life conflict in the context of the capitalist development. Ensuring life sustainability requires focusing on social reproduction due to its importance for the life of people and for being a determinant factor of capital accumulation possibilities. Ensuring debt sustainability – from the orthodox perspective – requires focusing on capital and the accumulation requirement; one of its mechanisms is the dispossession of social reproduction work.
In the following section, the meaning and the way of calculating debt sustainability frequently used by credit international institutions and governments are presented so as to evidence the contradiction between both goals and the need to include deep changes in the conceptual and methodological framework of the debt analysis.
3. Debt sustainability: the economic orthodoxy
Debt sustainability has a positive meaning in terms of economic performance from most of the economic doctrines, and even using common sense. Being against debt that is sustainable is very difficult. However, if the principles used for the calculation and the measures involved in ensuring a positive outcome are analyzed, the costs in terms of welfare and human rights of people end up with a negative balance.
Capital over people
The concern over the analysis of debt sustainability became stronger in the debate at the beginning of the new millennium after recurring crises and in an international context where globalization forecasted an increasing economic unpredictability.
Debt management from the economic orthodoxy, as indicated by the IMF and the WB, is based on the analysis of the costs and risks of the loan portfolio, whose main goal is to ensure the ability to pay the public debt.
With this information, public institutions responsible for debt management, in general ministries of finances, are often in charge of defining and creating a ‘debt profile’ that considers current indebtedness and ideally future indebtedness projections, which in turn enables them to estimate the burden of debt payment and non-payment risks.
This analysis is not only made by the public sector. Private risk rating agencies, such as Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch, also assess the quality of the sovereign debt and they become signallers for international financial markets.1 Therefore, governments not only look for good ratings by those agencies, but also pay for getting those assessments. The goals of these ratings are to generate information that proves or guarantees the payment of principal and reveals potential related risks (Delgado, 2006: 304).
From this perspective, the goal of the institutional structure is to guarantee favourable conditions for capital. The experience of the recent debt crises shows that governments and financial agencies have also chosen to comply with loan agreements and to transfer the costs of the crisis to the population at the time of debt repayment. The ultimate goal of debt sustainability is to ensure the conditions that national and international financial flows require for the repayment of the principal and the payment of interest, and for that purpose countries need proper procedures of risk management.
Debt sustainability: frequently used (androcentric) indicators
According to the IMF, the public debt of a country is considered sustainable if the government can comply with all its current and future payment obligations without exceptional financial aid or default.
The methodology the IMF uses and that, in general, is used by countries and even other creditors, is classified into two types: Debt Sustainability Analysis (DSA) for low-income countries (LIC DSA) and Debt Sustainability Analysis for international market-access countries (MAC DSA). The use may vary considering that there are low- and middle-income countries that are assessed with the DSA for low-income countries.
In the first case, indebtedness thresholds or limits are used as solvency and liquidity indicators in accordance with the ability to manage debt (low, moderate and high); the more management ability a country has, the higher the margin of indebtedness limit (IMF, 2018). In the second case, thresholds are not applied because a framework of sovereign risk with several sustainability criteria is used, which adjust to the context and the size of economy of the countries.
Solvency:
current value of the external public debt as a GDP percentage;
current value of the external public debt as a percentage of the export of goods and services.
Other indicators are also used, such as the indicator of total public debt (internal and external) of the non-financial public sector (NFPS) as a GDP percentage. However, there is no general agreement on what level of debt is ‘dangerous’. Critical values vary significantly in accordance with the type of economy and the methodology applied. A value considered acceptable for industrialized countries is considered too dangerous for developing countries. For instance, one of the criteria of the Maastricht Treaty for the adoption of a common currency in the European Union was to have a public debt under 60 per cent of the GDP.
Liquidity:
total public debt service as a proportion of public revenue: repayment capacity;
external public debt service as a proportion of exports.
In general terms, the data of indicators from the current year or previous years are public information. However, for the purposes of analyzing debt sustainability, it is essential to count and clearly spread the projections of stock, service, GDP, public revenue and so on for a period of time of at least ten years. This way the government, as well as the members of parliament and other actors of a country, have the necessary information to assess the burden and cost of a certain loan in the social debt for future generations, with the risk of deepening existing gaps if the destination of those resources does not generate transformations towards the reduction of inequalities.
Debt sustainability: austerity versus tax justice
In accordance with the orthodox vision, the debt origin is public deficit, which is generated when revenue is lower than expenditure. Therefore, deficit reduction is the first goal in the agreements with international agencies, such as the IMF. For that purpose, the first response has been to limit the necessary resources for the implementation of public policies or implement regressive taxes that enable a faster tax collection, which in general is unfair and generates inequalities.
Apart from the fact that the repayment capacity is a priority in this approach, the analysis of debt sustainability may have very optimistic projections and give a wrong impression about future sustainability, as well as the difficulty to include the evolution of different types of debt that countries have today in scenarios of risk, and other exogenous factors that may affect repayment capacity. In this respect, this tool is not appropriate for the financial strategies that a country needs to be able to guarantee rights and achieve development goals.
As to the destination of the resources obtained through indebtedness, the works carried out in the context of gender-responsive budgets evidence the low fiscal priority that policies whose goal is to ensure women’s rights have had. In most Latin American countries, the resources allocated to prevent gender violence and implement care policies are scarce, and many times they are subject to budget cutbacks.
In consequence, austerity not only has the goal of addressing a debt crisis, but it also precedes it. Debt crisis is postponed at the expense of women, but at the same time there are other expenses that are continuously generated whose importance is above the ones needed to ensure women’s rights (Serafini and Fois, 2021: 16–17).
Blanchard (1990) and Buiter (1985) defined two conditions for a public debt sustainability based on the intertemporal budget restriction of the government: i) the debt/GDP relation should converge in the long term to its initial level after a period in which it has significantly grown, and this requires the generation of a primary surplus after the growth period of the debt/GDP ratio; and ii) for a fiscal policy to be sustainable, the government with a pending debt should execute the primary budget surplus.
The widespread option has been to generate this surplus by reducing expenses, not by increasing revenue, despite the fact that the analytical framework includes this possibility. Box 15.1 shows the main indicators, including the ‘tax gap’ indicator.
Box 15.1: Indicators of debt sustainability
Primary gap (Blanchard, 1990): This indicator warns about the primary balance required to stabilize the debt/GDP ratio, given the projected paths of the actual interest rate and the GDP.
where Dt is the public debt in the t period, rt is the interest rate of the debt, and Bt is the primary fiscal balance (without including the payment of interest).
Debt mismatch (Calvo, Izquierdo and Talvi, 2003): owing to the high volatility of macroeconomic variables and capital flows in Latin America, a crucial element for debt sustainability is its composition (what currencies and in which proportion form such debt) based on the composition of the (tradable and non-tradable) national production. The external debt proportion over the internal debt is compared to the proportion of the production of tradable goods over the production of non-tradable goods in the economy. This is a perfect match (indicator=1) when tradable goods participate in the GDP in the same proportion in which the external debt participates in the total public debt. The other end is the perfect mismatch with the indicator 0.
Croce and Juan-Ramón (2003): the authorities determine the maximum level of debt/GDP and the primary surplus to achieve is calculated.
The tax political gap (Blanchard, 1990): proposes a sustainability indicator that considers the consistency or gap in the current tax policy while keeping the debt/GDP ratio constant. This is the indicator tax gap that measures the difference between the existing tax burden and the ‘sustainable’ tax burden.
This indicator shows the level of tax burden required to stabilize the debt/GDP ratio, with a level of expenditure, a path of GDP growth and an initial debt stock. If the ratio is negative, the indicator shows that the tax pressure of the economy is too low to stabilize the debt/GDP ratio.
The creation of fiscal space through the increase of tax resources is not often considered as a strategy of debt sustainability. On the contrary, one of the main pillars of the Washington Consensus implemented to face the debt crisis in the 1980s was tax reduction. The outcome was the so-called ‘lost decade’ in the 1980s and it even continued far beyond the 1990s for some countries.
As evidenced, the decisions about debt sustainability, apart from their technical-economic content, imply to prioritize debt repayment and a clear stance as to the sectors that benefit from debt – capital holders and beneficiaries of infrastructure works – and the general population that will suffer the effects of adjustments when funds have to be repaid.
The analysis of debt sustainability ex-ante provides the magnitude of the necessary and permanent fiscal adjustment so that debt can become sustainable. There are three groups of variables. As explained in the previous paragraphs, the control of the primary deficit is the first and most important group, which involves measures from the expenditure side and from the revenue side.
Besides, the planned outcomes in the debt sustainability indicators can be ensured through GDP growth. However, growth is not neutral to women and gender inequalities as certain patterns of growth may be useful for debt sustainability, but they do not necessarily contribute to the economic autonomy of women. Economic growth is sustained, without including it in its measurement, in unpaid and care work that mainly women perform.
GDP performance in Latin America has not benefited men and women alike. A key outcome is the divergence between growth rates and the feminization of poverty. Latin America shows that as the GDP grew, so did the index of feminization of poverty in all the countries of the region, evidencing that benefits were not equally distributed.
Another indicator that shows the insufficiency of growth to improve opportunities and the economic autonomy of women is the persistence of the income gap between men and women, who receive about 20 per cent less than men.
This lower remuneration ends up being a subsidy for the activities and economic branches that benefit from women’s work. This subsidy increases if the high burden of unpaid work is considered, estimated at 15 per cent of the GDP in the region, along with its role in the reduction of the costs of the food basket. Ultimately, GDP growth that contributes to improve the indicators of debt sustainability does not necessarily translate into something beneficial for women.
A variable that also affects debt sustainability in a positive way is the input of capital flows because it enables the interest rate and the exchange rate to be sustained, and it eases the problem of currency mismatch. Also, this flow is not gender neutral because family remittances, tourism and maquila intervene with a high proportion of women due to their participation in the global chains of care or their high labour participation in precarious jobs with wage discrimination.
Finally, it is also relevant to analyze debt financing processes along with the demographic structure and the life cycle of countries. Sustainability calculations are made to 20 years at most, while refinancing may obtain longer terms, which may have impacts on intergenerational and gender equity. In the future, whenever it would be necessary to increase taxes to repay the debt, women who could not save enough money in social security
Fiscal rules and their blindness to women’s rights and gender inequalities
The analysis of debt sustainability goes hand in hand with the existence of the fiscal rules that have been implemented since 1985 and a recent boost for the implementation of fiscal councils, promoted by the IMF. Arguments in favour of fiscal rules and fiscal councils include the need to avoid a deficit bias and to establish a depoliticized framework for the fiscal policy (Braun and Gadano, 2007), and to look for an alleged independence similar to the one expected from central banks with the monetary policy.
For the IMF,
fiscal rules are long-lasting constraints on fiscal policy aimed at providing a credible commitment to fiscal discipline. They set numerical limits on a budgetary aggregate (e.g. level of public debt, deficit, growth of public expenditures). These constraints are useful to address deficit biases (that can lead to excessive debt levels) and procyclical policies (exacerbating economic cycles), ultimately helping promote more prudent and stabilizing fiscal policies. (IMF, 2022: 1)
There exist four types of fiscal rules used in the context of debt sustainability: budget balance rules (BBR), debt rules (DR), expenditure rules (ER) and revenue rules (RR) that are applied to the central or general government, or the public sector. The rules have information on their legal basis, coverage, escape clauses and stabilization features, as well as the application procedures, and they balance the existing key support characteristics, including independent control agencies and laws of fiscal accountability.
Although there are four types of rules, the most common ones have been a combination of a debt rule along with operating limits of expenditure or budget balance. Davoodi et al (2022: 7) state that in 2021 about 70 per cent of the countries with fiscal rules had a debt rule combined with another aggregate. One third had a debt rule together with a deficit limit and an expenditure ceiling, while another quarter had a debt rule combined with a budget balance rule. According to these authors, expenditure rules are more and more common and they are often set as a maximum limit to the annual growth of expenditure. Revenue rules are less used under the argument that governments have less control over annual revenue.
Fiscal rules also have gender biases:
Some countries have as a rule a debt or deficit ‘golden rule’ only for physical investment, as human capital investment is considered in the national accounts as a current expense (Truger, 2016), which would also include care. De Henau and Himmelweit (2020), and Himmelweit and Perrons (2006) reject this assumption stating that investment in care has high levels of return, even higher than physical investment due to the effect on the expansion of labour opportunities for women. The return of the investment on human capital and care is not considered in GDP or the tax system, but international agencies (IMF and WB) do include the incorporation of women to increase GDP (without taking into account the excess of hours they already have) and reduce the debt burden.
As no fiscal rules are incorporated on the side of revenue and as rules are stated on the side of expenditure or balance, the basic principles of human rights, such as progressiveness, non-discrimination or the use of the maximum available resources are not guaranteed and the ‘austerity’ goal is placed as a priority.
The rules applied in Latin American countries – as well as in the rest of the world – are designed to limit social expenditure and promote austerity:
Expenditure rules: Peru, Paraguay, Grenada, Argentina, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama, the Bahamas, Honduras, El Salvador, Brazil, Mexico and Jamaica.
Debt rules: Argentina (subnational), the Bahamas, Brazil (subnational), Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Jamaica, Peru, Panama and Uruguay.
Balance rules: Brazil, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, the Bahamas, Honduras, Jamaica, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Mexico, Chile and Colombia.
Revenue rules: El Salvador.
Dondo and Oliva (2021) propose other types of rules, such as:
When the budgets for Health and Education do not reach at least 4 per cent of the GDP, or show annual increases lower than 0.25 per cent of the GDP, the government will automatically charge an extraordinary tax to large fortunes.
When certain sectors have extraordinary profits, an additional tax rate will be automatically applied to their income tax, which could have a specific allocation.
To limit tax expenses (resources that the State stops collecting when it grants any preferential tax treatment). For instance, the tax expense generated by the subsidies and benefits granted to large economic groups cannot exceed 1 per cent of the GDP.
4. Debt sustainability: life after capital
The debt process is part of a system that includes all the economic sectors (real, monetary, public and external) where women are invisibilized or considered as an instrument. Indebtedness is part of the fiscal policy;
The analysis and the calculation of debt sustainability are not gender neutral and threaten life sustainability by prioritizing capital interest over the rights and needs of the population.
Debt sustainability is a political fact, more than a technical and economic calculation, as it implies to value and then decide over whom falls the burden of the financial and fiscal consequences. This decision focuses on women as the main responsible ones for the social reproduction of life and as generators of flows of material and symbolic resources that contribute to guarantee sustainability.
Budget restrictions that result from the need to reduce deficit or guarantee debt repayment prevent the financing of policies that ensure rights and satisfy women’s needs. These same restrictions do not affect capital because they enable increasing debt to continue to keep the conditions its continuous accumulation requires, such as through investment in infrastructure (that often includes care infrastructure).
The priority given to the financial protection of the interest of financiers over the interest of the population of the borrower countries, including women, deepened a condition and position that was already subordinated prior to indebtedness or the debt crisis.
The consequences of ensuring debt sustainability from an androcentric perspective promote a greater pressure over the work of women, either paid or unpaid. The shrinkage of the State in public services generates indebtedness of households and overloads women with work, aimed at providing these services in a private or family way. Thus, debt sustainability is based on the self-exploitation of families and women that are part of them, deepening the social reproduction and care crisis.
Not including the debt impact on women’s rights in the analyses of debt sustainability is not a universally valid technical criterion, but a political decision with deep legal implications: it is a way of creating the conditions to perpetuate the violations of the human rights of women.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Rodolfo Bejarano, Daniela Berdeja and Carola Mejia for their feedback.
Note
Risk rating agencies were the target of criticism and even lawsuits and fines after the 2009 financial crisis due to their role in favourable ratings that generated excessive indebtedness of families and companies, and that finally ended up in default, which caused the global financial crisis. The conflicts of interest generated were the main focus of criticism, because certifications are hired by the same parties to be rated. Besides, under an oligopoly, risk rating agencies may have simultaneous access to the information of the public and private
References
Blanchard, O. (1990) ‘Suggestions for a New Set of Fiscal Indicators’ (OECD Economics Department Working Papers No. 79), OECD [online] 1 April, Available from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/435618162862.pdf?expires=1671474569&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=02C9BB8498F7929BD66C1DF1D42350FC
Bosch, A.; Carrasco, C. and Grau, E. (2005) ‘Verde que te quiero violeta. Encuentros y desencuentros entre feminismo y ecologismo’, [online], Available from: https://www.fuhem.es/media/cdv/file/biblioteca/Boletin_ECOS/10/verde_que_te_quiero_violeta.pdf
Braun, M. and Gadano, N. (2007) ‘¿Para qué sirven las reglas fiscales? Un análisis crítico de la experiencia argentina’, Revista de la CEPAL, 91(April): 53–65.
Buiter, W. (1985) ‘A guide to public sector debt and deficits’, Economic Policy, 1(1): 13–79
Caffentzis, G. (1999) ‘On the notion of a crisis of social reproduction: A theoretical review’, in M. Dalla Costa and G. Dalla Costa (eds), Women, Development and Labor of Reproduction, Eritrea: Africa World Press.
Calvo, G.; Izquierdo , A. and Talvi, E. (2003) ‘Sudden stops, the real exchange rate and fiscal sustainability: Argentina’s lessons’, Inter American Development Bank.
Carrasco, C.; Borderías, C. and Torns, T. (2011) ‘Introducción: El trabajo de cuidados: antecedentes históricos y debates actuales’, Catarata, Available from: https://www.fuhem.es/media/cdv/file/biblioteca/Economia_critica/El-trabajo-de-cuidados_introduccion.pdf
Croce, E. and Juan-Ramón, H. (2003) ‘Assessing fiscal sustainability: A Cross-Country Comparison’, IMF Working Papers Working, 3(145), Available from: https://doi.org/10.5089/9781451856569.001
Davoodi H.R.; Elger, P;. Fotiou, A.; Garcia-Macia, D.; Han, X.; Lagerborg, A.; et al (2022) ‘Fiscal rules and fiscal councils: Recent trends and performance during the pandemic’ (Working Paper No 22/11), IMF.
De Henau, J. and Himmelweit, S. (2020) ‘The gendered employment gains of investing in social vs. physical infrastructure: evidence from simulations across seven OECD countries’ (IKD Working Paper No 84), The Open University [online] April, Available from: https://www.open.ac.uk/ikd/sites/www.open.ac.uk.ikd/files/files/working-papers/DeHenauApril2020v3.pdf
Delgado, A. (2006) ‘Calificadoras y costos asociados con la calificación riesgo-país’, in E. Correa and A. Girón (2006) Reforma Financiera en América Latina, CLACSO [online], Available from: http://bibliotecavirtual.clacso.org.ar/ar/libros/edicion/correa/guzman.pdf
Dondo, M. and Oliva, N. (2021) ‘¿Qué son las reglas fiscales?’, CELAG blog [online] 27 September, Available from: https://www.celag.org/nuevo-enfoque-en-el-diseno-de-reglas-fiscales/
Federici, S. (2010) Calibán y la bruja. Mujeres, cuerpo y acumulación primitiva, Madrid : Traficantes de sueños, Available from: https://traficantes.net/sites/default/files/pdfs/Caliban%20y%20la%20bruja-TdS.pdf
Harvey, D. (2005) ‘El ‘nuevo’ imperialismo: acumulación por desposesión’, CLACSO [online], Available from: http://biblioteca.clacso.edu.ar/clacso/se/20130702120830/harvey.pdf
Himmelweit, S. and Perrons, D. (2006) ‘Gender and fiscal rules: how can we afford the rising cost of care?’, [online], Available from: https://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/CP/May2006_symposium_papers/paper_Himmelweit_Perrons.pdf
IMF (2018) ‘The Debt Sustainability Framework for Low-Income Countries’, [online] 13 July, Available from: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/dsa/lic.htm
IMF (FMI) (2022) ‘Reglas fiscales, cláusulas de escape y shocks de gran magnitud’, Fiscal Affairs, Available from: https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/covid19-special-notes/Spanish/spspecial-series-on-covid19fiscal-rules-escape-clauses-and-large-shocks.ashx
Serafini, V. and Fois, M. (2021) ‘Mujeres, deuda y desigualdades de Género’, Latindadd [online], Available from: https://www.latindadd.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Mujeres-deuda-y-desigualdad-Final-1.pdf
Truger, A. (2016) ‘Reviving fiscal policy in Europe: towards an implementation of the golden rule of public investment’, European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, 13(1): 57–71.
