Long ignored, Social and Solidarity Economy (SSE) practices have been getting growing attention in the last decades from academics and policymakers alike (Laville and Cattani 2006). Public authorities increasingly recognize SSE, for instance, several Latin American countries have passed new laws or have created public institutions dedicated to the SSE. In India, though the term “solidarity economy” is not used, there is a long-standing tradition of grass-root organisations working either on everyday practical issues, in multiple sectors of the economy, or for social protection for informal workers, combining “struggle” and “development” (Kabeer et al. 2013, Chatterjee 2014), that are increasingly engaging in lobbying activities with public authorities. Along with a reflection on direct income initiatives, government schemes and the new politics of distribution (Ferguson 2015), this growing interest has manifested itself in publications, conferences, laws, and the creation of public institutions for SSE. UNRISD created a UN Inter-Agency Task Force on SSE in 2013. In face of the challenges of inequality and climate change, the UN has put forward SSE as a possible alternative model of production, financing and consumption (UNRISD 2014). This growing interest in social and solidarity economy by both academics and politicians, however, remains gender-blind, even though these practices are highly gendered and women play a major role in them (Verschuur, Guérin, Hillenkamp 2015). On the other hand, although feminist economics has clearly articulated the concepts of social reproduction and the care economy (Benería 1979, Esquivel 2014), these theorizations tend to pay little attention to forms of collective and solidarity-based care provision (Fournier et al. 2013). This research addresses these gaps in SSE analysis and policies from a feminist perspective.