Towards 2030 UN Agenda on Sustainable Development Goals: Technical Challenges in Measuring the Gender Inequality for Asia Pacific

Aggarwal, Bhavya and Chakraborty, Lekha S (2015): Towards 2030 UN Agenda on Sustainable Development Goals: Technical Challenges in Measuring the Gender Inequality for Asia Pacific.

Abstract

Against the backdrop of UN 2030 Sustainable Development agenda, this paper analyses the measurement issues in gender based indices constructed by UNDP and suggests alternatives for choice of variables, functional form and weights. Despite their relevance, the composite indices like Gender Development Index (GDI) and Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) have been criticized for their technical flaws and later replaced with Gender Inequality Index (GII). While GII conceptually reflects the loss in achievement due to inequality between men and women in three dimensions- health, empowerment and labour force participation – we argue that the assumptions and the choice of variables to capture these dimensions remain inadequate and erroneous, resulting in the partial capture of gender inequalities. Since the dimensions used for GII are different from HDI, we cannot say that a higher value of GII represents loss in HDI due to gender inequalities. However, while it is debatable the advantages of using GII over GDI (GDI is equally distributed equivalent of HDI which measures gender gap in three dimensions of human development-health, education and command over economic resources), one of the main drawbacks of using GII is that along with the inequality indicators of women vis-à-vis men, it also takes absolute indicators that are defined specifically for women- like maternal mortality rate (MMR) and adolescent fertility rate (AFR). The corresponding values for men for these absolute variables are taken as 1 which is unrealistic and leads to overestimation of the gap between women and men’s health standards. The technical obscurity remains how to interpret the index by combining women specific indicators with indicators that are defined for both. GII is a partial construct as it has not captured many significant dimensions of gender inequality. Though this requires a data revolution, we tried to reconstruct GII in the context of Asia-Pacific using three scenarios: (i) improving the set of variables incorporating unpaid care work, pay gap, intra-household decision making, exposure to knowledge networks and feminisation of governance at local levels; (ii) constructing a decomposed index to specify the direction of gender gaps and (iii) an alternative index using Principal Components Index (PCI) for assigning weights. The choice of countries under the three scenarios is constrained by data paucity. The results revealed that UNDP GII overestimates the gap between the two genders and using women specific indicators leads to a fallacious estimation of gender inequality. The estimates are illustrative. The implication of the results broadly suggests a return to GDI for capturing the gender development, with an improvised set of choices and variables

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: D63, J16, J31, O15
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E0 - General; J - Labor and Demographic Economics > J1 - Demographic Economics > J16 - Economics of Gender ; Non-labor Discrimination; J - Labor and Demographic Economics > J3 - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs > J38 - Public Policy; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O1 - Economic Development

References

Adelman, I and Morris, C T (1967):'Society, Politics and Economic Development', John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

Anand, Sudhir, Amartya Sen, 1995. “Gender Inequality in Human Development: Theories and Measurement”, Occasional Paper 19, Human Development Report, UNDP: New York.

Anand, S and Ravallion, M (1993): ‘Human Development in Poor Countries: On the Role of Private Incomes and Public Services’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7 (Winter).

Bardhan, Kalpana, Stephan Klasen, 1999. UNDP’s Gender-Related Indices: A Critical Review, World Development, 27(6); 985-1010 (June).

Bartuskova, Lucia, Karina Kubelkova, 2014. Main Challenges in Measuring Gender Inequality, Proceedings of FIKUSZ'14, 19-28.

Becker, G. (1965) “A Theory of the Allocation of Time.” The Economic Journal, Vol. 75, No. 299. (Sep., 1965), pp. 493-517

Beneria, L., and Feldman, S., (1992) Unequal Burden: Economic Crises, Persistent Poverty, and Women's Work (eds.), Westview Press, Boulder, CO.

Beneria, L and Inaki Permanyer, 2010. The measurement of Socio-economic gender Inequality revisited, Development and Change, 41(3), pages 375-399.

Chakraborty,L . 2014. Integrating Time in Public Policy: Empirical Description of Gender-specific Outcomes and Budgeting, Working Paper 785, Levy Economics Institute, New York.

Geske Dijkstra, A. 2006., "Towards a fresh start in measuring gender equality: A contribution to the debate." Journal of Human Development 7.2: 275-283.

Haq, M U (1995): 'Reflections on Human Development', Oxford University Press, New York.

Hawken, Angela, Gerardo L. Munck, 2013. Cross-National Indices with Gender-Differentiated Data: What Do They Measure? How Valid Are They? Social Indicators Research, 111(3); 801-838, May.

Hicks and Streeten, P (1979):'Indicators of development: The search for a basic needs yardstick", World Development, 7, 567-580

Klasen, Stephen and Dana Schüler., 2011. Reforming the Gender-Related Development Index and the Gender Empowerment Measure: Implementing Some Specific Proposals, Feminist Economics, Volume 17, Issue 1, 2011

Lahiri, Ashok, Lekha Chakraborty and P N Bhattacharyya ., 2003., Gender Budgeting in India, UN Women publication.

McGillivray, M (1991): 'The Human Development Index: Yet another redundant composite development indicator?", World Development, 19, 1461-1468.

McGillivray, M and White, H (1993): 'Measuring development? The UNDP's Human Development Index', Journal of International Development 5, 183-192.

Morris, M D (1979): 'Measuring the condition of the world's poor: The Physical Quality of Life Index', Pergamon, New York.

Noorbakhsh, Farhad.1998., "A modified human development index." World Development 26.3 (1998): 517-528.

Permanyer, Iñaki, 2013. A Critical Assessment of the UNDP’s Gender Inequality Index, Feminist Economics, 19(2); 1-32 (March).

Permanyer, Iñaki,, 2010. The Measurement of Multidimensional Gender Inequality: Continuing the Debate, Social Indicators Research, 95(2); 181-198 (January).

United Nations (1954): 'Report on International Definition and and Measurement of Standards and Levels of Living', United Nations, New York.

United Nations Development Programme (various issues): Human Development Reports, various issues.

United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) (1972): 'Contents and Measurement of Socio-economic Development', Praeger Publishers, New York.

UNDP, 1995. Human Development Report, UNDP: New York.

UNDP,2013. “Technical notes Calculating the human development indices—graphical presentation”, in Human Development Report 2014, 1:8., UNDP: New York.