Skip to main content

Beyond Economic Barriers: Intersectionality and Health Policy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: The Politics of Intersectionality ((POLI))

Abstract

Intersectionality—a framework for understanding how multiple sources of power and disadvantage intersect and influence behaviours, practices, and outcomes—increasingly drives a growing body of research the world over. More recent work also focuses on translating these concepts and evidence into the policy sphere. This chapter explores the concepts of deep poverty, hyper entitlements, rationing, and leveraging as linked to the positionality and voice of different groups in the intersectional socioeconomic order. Both positionality and voice are important in determining what policies are enacted, how they come into being and are implemented, and what their impact might be on specific groups. The authors argue that for groups at both extremes of the socioeconomic order, important sources of inequality tend to reinforce each other, albeit in opposing directions. Synergies of this kind do not hold for groups in the middle of the order for whom different sources of advantage and disadvantage may work against each other. These differences also account for the shifting positionality and voice of particular groups across geographic locales and time. They shape the fluidity of relations among groups, as manifested in complex politics of accommodation, negotiation, collaboration, and opposition, with important implications for policy formulation and implementation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    EAG states in India and C-category districts in the state of Karnataka refer to the regions that lag behind in the demographic transition and are socioeconomically backward.

  2. 2.

    The concept of multidimensional poverty comes closest to such an approach, but it has tended thus far to identify the presence of different dimensions with less attention to the interactions among them (Bourguignon and Chakravarty 2003). It has also focused more on outcomes such as health or education (Alkire et al. 2016), rather than on the underlying power relations such as caste or gender that define intersectionality.

  3. 3.

    We do not mean to suggest that these multiple relations of power and privilege do not affect (for better or worse) those who are higher up the socioeconomic spectrum. We discuss this phenomenon later in the chapter.

  4. 4.

    Of course, programme implementers may focus on low-hanging fruit for other reasons including their own beliefs, practices, and biases.

  5. 5.

    The term tribal has a long and complex history in the context of India, which we cannot get into here. However, it may be seen as the rough equivalent of an ethnic or an indigenous minority in other contexts.

  6. 6.

    Lack of attention to intersections may not be the only reason that conditional cash transfers may not work.

  7. 7.

    These struggles have been part of the political landscape since at least the setting up of the Mandal Commission in 1979, and bubble up regularly as in the current so-called Patidar movement in Gujarat (Gavaskar 2015; Tilche 2016).

  8. 8.

    As exemplified by the continuing challenges to the US Supreme Court’s Brown vs Board of Education ruling favouring affirmative action, or the middle-class struggles against the recent Right to Education Act in India (Sarin and Gupta 2014).

  9. 9.

    Though not the very poorest.

  10. 10.

    These include the Rajiv Aarogyasri Scheme in the state of Andhra Pradesh (since 2007), the Chief Minister’s Kalaignar Insurance Scheme for life-saving treatments in Tamil Nadu (since 2009; rechristened Chief Minister’s Comprehensive Health Insurance Scheme since 2011), the Vajpayee Arogyashree Scheme in Karnataka (since 2011), and the Rajiv Gandhi Jeevandayee Arogya Yojana in Maharashtra (since 2012).

  11. 11.

    ‘Floater’ refers to the fact that all members of the household are registered under a single card, and the amount available can be used for any one or any combination of them.

  12. 12.

    This list is based on population-based surveys of BPL households conducted by state governments across India in 2002. Each BPL family is identified by the member designated as the household’s head (Ram et al. 2009). Households excluded in this way will also include female-headed households whose former male head may have either died recently or who may have abandoned the household.

  13. 13.

    The relevant social criteria will obviously vary depending upon the context.

References

  • Agarwal, B. (1997). “Bargaining” and Gender Relations: Within and Beyond the Household. Feminist Economics, 3(1), 1–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alkire, S., Jindra, C., Robles, G., & Vaz, A. (2016, June). Multidimensional Poverty Index – Summer 2016: Brief Methodological Note and Results. OPHI Briefing 42. Oxford: University of Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anand, S., & Fan, V. (2016). The Health Workforce in India. Human Resources for Health Observer Series No. 16. Geneva: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bassel, L., & Emejulu, A. (2010). Struggles for Institutional Space in France and the United Kingdom: Intersectionality and the Politics of Policy. Politics and Gender, 6(4), 517–544. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X10000358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, F. (2013). Researching Within-Household Distribution: Overview, Developments, Debates, and Methodological Challenges. Family Relations, 75, 582–597. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, P., Ahuja, R., & Bhandari, L. (2010). The Impoverishing Effect of Healthcare Payments in India: New Methodology and Findings. Economic and Political Weekly, XLV(16), 65–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borooah, V. K., Sabharwal, N. S., Diwakar, D. G., Mishra, V. K., & Naik, A. K. (2015). Caste, Discrimination, and Exclusion in Modern India. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourguignon, F., & Chakravarty, S. R. (2003). The Measurement of Multidimensional Poverty. Journal of Economic Inequality, 1, 25–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerceau, S. (2012, December). Gender Equality in Access to Health Care: The Role of Social Health Protection. A Case Study on India’s National Health Insurance Scheme RSBY. GIZ Discussion Papers on Social Protection, no. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • CSDH (Commission on Social Determinants of Health). (2008). Closing the Gap in a Generation: Health Equity Through Action on the Social Determinants of Health. Final Report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damoon, R. K. (2011). Considerations on Mainstreaming Intersectionality. Political Research Quarterly, 64(1), 230–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (2008). Intersectionality as Buzzword: A Sociology of Science Perspectives on What Makes a Feminist Theory Successful. Feminist Theory, 9(1), 67–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutta, M., & Husain, Z. (2013). Does Health Insurance Ensure Equitable Health Outcomes? An Analysis of Hospital Services Usage in Urban India. World Health Population, 14(4), 38–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folbre, N. (1986). Hearts and Spades: Paradigms of Household Economics. World Development, 14(2), 245–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gavaskar, M. (2015). Patidar Anamat Andolan: Reinventing a Social Identity. Economic and Political Weekly, 50(40), 1–2, http://www.epw.in/node/145894/pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of India. (2006). Social, Economic and Educational Status of the Muslim Community of India: A Report. Prime Minister’s High Level Committee. New Delhi: Cabinet Secretariat, Government of India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, A.-M. (2007). When Multiplication Doesn’t Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 5(1), 63–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592707070065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hankivsky, O., & Cormier, R. (2011). Intersectionality and Public Policy: Some Lessons from Existing Models. Political Research Quarterly, 64(1), 217–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hankivsky, O., Grace, D., Hunting, G., Giesbrecht, M., Fridkin, A., Rudrum, S., et al. (2014). An Intersectionality-Based Policy Analysis Framework: Critical Reflections on a Methodology for Advancing Equity. International Journal for Equity in Health, 13, 119 Retrieved from http://www.equityhealthj.com/content/13/1/119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iyer, A., Sen, G., & George, A. (2007). The Dynamics of Gender and Class in Access to Health Care: Evidence from Rural Karnataka, India. International Journal of Health Services, 37(3), 537–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jain, K. (2013, June). Health Financing and Delivery in India: An Overview of Selected Schemes. WIEGO Working Paper (Social Protection), no. 29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joe, W. (2014). Intersectional Inequalities in Immunization in India, 1992–93 to 2005–06: A Progress Assessment. Health Policy and Planning, 30, 407–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, E. (1997). The Intra-Household Economics of Voice and Exit. Feminist Economics, 3(3), 25–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kidd, S. (2014, April). Social Exclusion and Access to Social Protection Schemes. Australian Government, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Retrieved from http://www.developmentpathways.co.uk/resources/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/social-exclusion-and-access-to-social-protection-schemes4.pdf.

  • Krieger, N. (2005). Embodiment: A Conceptual Glossary for Epidemiology. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 59, 350–355. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2004.024562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krieger, N., & Smith, G. D. (2004). ‘Bodies Count’, and Body Counts: Social Epidemiology and Embodying Inequality. Epidemiologic Reviews, 26, 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxh009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lombardo, E., & Agustin, L. R. (2012). Framing Gender Intersections in the European Union: What Implications for the Quality of Intersectionality in Policies? Social Politics, 19(4), 482–512. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxr001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manuel, T. (2006). Envisioning the Possibilities for a Good Life: Exploring the Public Policy Implications of Intersectionality Theory. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 28(3–4), 173–203. https://doi.org/10.1300/J501v28n03_08.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nandi, A., Ashok, A., & Laxminarayan, R. (2013). The Socioeconomic and Institutional Determinants of Participation in India’s Health Insurance Scheme for the Poor. PLoS One, 8(6), e66296. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayana, D. (2010). Review of the Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana. Economic and Political Weekly, XLV(29), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRHM (National Rural Health Mission). (2013). Guidance Note for Implementation of RMNCH+A Interventions in High Priority Districts, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Government of India: New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parken, A., & Young, H. (2007). Integrating the Promotion of Equality and Human Rights for All, Cardiff, Wales: Towards the Commission of Equality and Human Rights. Unpublished Report for the Welsh Assembly Government and Equality and Human Rights Commission; Cited by Hankivsky, O. & Cormier, R. (2011). Intersectionality and Public Policy: Some Lessons from Existing Models. Political Research Quarterly, 64(1), 217–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ram, F., Mohanty, S. K., & Ram, U. (2009). Understanding the Distribution of BPLCards: All-India and Selected States. Economic and Political Weekly, XLIV(7), 66–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, K. S. (2013, June 26). Doctors by Merit, Not Privilege. The Hindu, p. 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rathi, P., Mukherji, A., & Sen, G. (2012). Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana: Evaluating Utilisation, Roll-Out and Perceptions in Amaravati District, Maharashtra. Economic and Political Weekly, XLVII(39), 57–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarin, A., & Gupta, S. (2014, September 20). Not Leading Towards an Egalitarian Education System: Quotas Under the Right to Education. Economic and Political Weekly, 49 (38), 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, G. (2010). Poor Households or Poor Women: Is There a Difference? In S. Chant (Ed.), The International Handbook on Gender and Poverty (pp. 101–105). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, G. (2012). Universal Health Coverage in India: A Long and Winding Road. Economic and Political Weekly, 47(8), 46–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, G., & Iyer, A. (2012). Who Gains, Who Loses, and How: Leveraging Gender and Class Intersections to Secure Health Entitlements. Social Science and Medicine, 74(11), 1802–1811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, G., & Iyer, A. (2015). Health Policy in India: Some Critical Concerns. In E. Kuhlmann, R. H. Blank, I. L. Bourgeault, & C. Wendt (Eds.), The Palgrave International Handbook of Healthcare Policy and Governance (pp. 154–170). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, G., Iyer, A., & Mukherjee, C. (2009). A Methodology to Analyse the Intersections of Social Inequalities in Health. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 10(3), 397–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, G., Iyer, A., Virani, A., Reddy, B., & Selvakumar, S. (2017). Translating Health Research to Policy: Breaking Through the Impermeability Barrier. In J. Georgalakis, N. Jessani, R. Oronje, & B. Ramalingam (Eds.), The Social Realities of Knowledge for Development (pp. 32–51). Brighton: IDS/Impact Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smooth, W. G. (2013). Intersectionality from Theoretical Framework to Policy Intervention. In A. R. Wilson (Ed.), Situating Intersectionality: Politics, Policy and Power (pp. 11–43). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, C. (2011). An Analysis of RSBY Enrolment Patterns: Preliminary Evidence and Lessons from the Early Experience. In R. Palacios, J. Das, & C. Sun (Eds.), India’s Health Insurance for the Poor. Evidence from the Early Experience of the Rashtriya Swathya Bima Yojana (pp. 84–116). New Delhi: Centre for Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundararaman, T., & Muraleedharan, V. R. (2015). Falling Sick, Paying the Price: NSS 71st Round on Morbidity and Costs of Healthcare. Economic and Political Weekly, 50(33), 17–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swarup, A., & Jain, N. (n.d.). Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana – A Case Study from India. Retrieved August 3, 2016, from http://www.rsby.gov.in/Documents.aspx?ID=14.

  • Tilche, A. (2016). Migration, Bachelorhood and Discontent Among the Patidars. Economic and Political Weekly, 51(26–27), 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, P. B., Whitehead, M., & Davidson, N. (1992). Inequalities in Health: The Black Report and the Health Divide (new 3rd ed.). London: Penguin Books Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Deurzen, I., van Oorschot, W., & van Ingen, E. (2014). The Link Between Inequality and Population Health in Low and Middle Income Countries: Policy Myth or Social Reality? PLoS One, 9(12), e115109. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vijaya, R. M., Lahoti, R., & Swaminathan, H. (2014). Moving from the Household to the Individual: Multidimensional Poverty Analysis. World Development, 59, 70–81 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.01.029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walby, S., Armstrong, J., & Strid, S. (2012). Intersectionality: Multiple Inequalities in Social Theory. Sociology, 46(2), 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038511416164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, M., Dahlgren, G., & Evans, T. (2001). Equity and Health Sector Reforms: Can Low-Income Countries Escape the Medical Poverty Trap? The Lancet, 358, 833–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2010). The Spirit Level: Why Equality Is Better for Everyone. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A. R. (Ed.). (2013). Situating Intersectionality: Politics, Policy and Power. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2016). World Development Indicators. Retrieved August 15, 2016, from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.PUBL.ZS?view=chart.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gita Sen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sen, G., Iyer, A. (2019). Beyond Economic Barriers: Intersectionality and Health Policy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. In: Hankivsky, O., Jordan-Zachery, J.S. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Intersectionality in Public Policy. The Politics of Intersectionality. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98473-5_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics