data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a86e7/a86e78ffac993cfeb4ef22e47c960b2a7bdbada2" alt="Printer-friendly version Printer-friendly version"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1b95/a1b9507646f5911f6e2ddcc1b9c3ef26e49548d2" alt="Send by email Send by email"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b1e05/b1e05f2c8c3151e1a6c58bb737a69426d57f4399" alt="PDF version PDF version"
Abstract
Canada and Australia, two liberal welfare states whose market-based ECEC systems consistently rank poorly on international measures, embraced similar short-term childcare policy responses to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic: widespread closures, reduced capacity of centers, establishment of publicly funded emergency childcare programs for essential workers, and short-term wage subsidies for essential workers (sometimes including educators). Rooted in a feminist political economy (FPE) theoretical framework and using a what-is-the-problem-represented-to-be (WPR) methodological approach, this article explores the extent to which the first and second “waves” of the COVID-19 pandemic policy responses in Canada and Australia framed childcare as a concern about gendered, reproductive labor within political representations of the policy problems to be solved.