Economic Development and Gender Equality A Positive or Negative Relationship

Economic Development in Asia Research Paper
Tan Zhiyang, Benson S8308207J
Economic Development and Gender Equality: A Positive or Negative Relationship?

You can tell the condition of the nation by looking at the status of its women. Jawaharlal Nehru
Introduction
It is commonly observed that the status of women in society is related to socio-economic development. Many measures of gender inequality support this. Looking at secondary school
education, one can see that for the poorest 25% of countries, only 5% of women has any secondary school education, whilst the figures are 51% for the richest 25%1. Some have been more explicit, arguing that economic development can lead to
improvement in gender equality2. Amongst many others, it has been argued that an increase in per capita income will lead to greater gender equality3. However, many others have argued that economic
development has not increased gender equality. Of note is the feminist school, which argues that economic growth increases the vulnerability of women to gender inequality4. Which leads to the question: which of these approaches are correct? This question is of significant importance. Many studies have shown that there are many positive effects on improving the
increasing gender equality, affecting the family, society, the economy and politics. Higher gender equality can lead to economic growth through increased output per capita5, increase their
daughters survivals6, and reduces infant and maternal mortality7, just to name a few. This paper found that the relationship between economic development and gender equality is not so clear. In some instances, it has been found that one approach is supported, while in other instances another approach is supported . This papers posits that a generalizable theory between economic development and gender equality is insufficient, and more research needs to be done to find out what are the conditions that causes one approach to work in one instance while causing another approach to work in another instance.
Literature Review
Contemporary work on the impact development and growth have on gender equality tends to fall under three schools of thought. In the first school, called the modernisation-neoclassical approach, believes that gender equality would improve as a country develops8. It has been argued that gender equality tends to improve with economic development, as gender equality in basic rights decreases as regions of the world get poorer. Others have suggested that increases in per capita income improve gender 2
equality9. Chen postulates that economic development may affect gender equality through wages. Wages increase with economic development, which increases the opportunity cost of not working. Others have stated that economic growth creates an increase in employment opportunities and competition that would eventually improve gender equality in education, finance and training 10. As opportunity cost increases, the formerly unemployed would be compelled to work. In countries where gender equality is low, the majority of the unemployed are women, thus women in this case would be compelled to work11. Others have agreed that economic growth together with increased access to education, health, credit, legal rights and employment opportunities will increase womens socio-economic role in developing countries. A second school of thought is what is called the Boserup approach, which believes that that economic growth and gender equality have a relationship in the form of a U shape. Where a country has no market economy, gender relations are more or less equal. As growth and development takes place, equality falls initially due to the specialisation of roles, with womens primary role as that of childcare and mens as that of a breadwinner. As the economy develops further, there would be an overall transformation in society and roles, and the above can be reversed due to increased economic opportunities and demand for female labour12.
There is a third school, which raises objections to the above contentions. This is know as the feminist approach, which believes that institutions like patriarchal family structures play a major role in reducing gender equality, and where economic growth is seen as a factor that increases the vulnerability of women to gender inequality. It has been argued in Morrison & Jutting that social institutions constitute the most important single factor that
determines womens economic choices, both directly and indirectly through their access to education and health care. They cited evidence that in the Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, the Middle East and North African regions, even as a country might experience high per capita incomes, it might have low gender equality. In further support, it shows that even in a same country, disparities in gender equality exist, supporting that argument that a country can develop even though gender inequalities persist13.
Contextualised Briefing
As this paper aims to do an Asia-wide study, and because comparing every single Asian country is beyond the scope of this paper, the main criteria is to select countries with the widest spread of politics, geographical area and religious influence. For political diversity, there are a mix of communist / socialist and ex-communist / socialist states (China, Vietnam and Laos), authoritarian and ex-authoritarian states (South Korea, Indonesia 4
and Pakistan14), and democracies or quasi-democracies (India, Japan and Malaysia). For geographical diversity, there is a mix of East Asia (China, South Korea and Japan), Southeast Asia (Vietnam, Indonesia, Laos and Malaysia), and South Asia (India and Pakistan). For religious diversity, there is a mix of Buddhist / Taoist / Confucian majorities (Japan and Laos), Muslim (Indonesia, Malaysia and Pakistan), Hindu (India) and no religion (China, Vietnam and South Korea15).
Analytical Framework
This paper chooses an empirical approach. Using this, the paper is able to evaluate whether the different levels of economic development corresponds with the varying levels of gender
inequality. Moreover, using this approach, this paper is able to determine whether the strength of economic development
corresponds with an equally strong gender equality increase. An example would be that 13% economic growth should see a higher increase of gender equality scores, and 2% economic growth should see a small increase in gender equality scores. Next, the nine countries selected will be grouped together based on the various measure of economic development to determine which of these measures of economic development matches corresponds closer with gender equality scores.
Methodology
One can measure economic development in many ways. This study would use both the static figures of per capita GDP, per capita GNI, and proportion of population living below US$1 a day, and the rates of change of per capita GDP, per capita GNI, and poverty levels measured as proportion of population living under US$1 a day, and GDP growth rates. These figures are selected because of the ease of which they can be obtained. Measuring gender equality is trickier. The quantitative
approach is to use indices, of which the UNDPs Gender-related Development Index (GDI) is the most common. However, GDI alone does not measure inequality; it is merely the Human Development Index (HDI) adjusted for gender disparities. Gender equality is the difference between the ratios of the two indicators16. Other ways to measure gender equality quantitatively are by using education and employment levels alone as proxies, as it was found that education and earning independent income from paid employment reduces anti-female bias and increase female voice and agency in the home17. Education can be measured by looking at gender
differentials in enrolment rates18 or the access and achievement of women in education19, amongst others. Employment is usually measured by finding the female share of the labour force in a country20. Other quantitative indicators include improvements in health21.
There are several criticisms for using just quantitative measures. First, it has been shown that generally, gender equality is improving in the world22. This creates problems as any form of economic development will be correlated with an increase with GDI scores. Second, the education and employment variables used in the index are not contextualized and therefore not useful for meaningful comparison across countries23. It has been argued that the content of schooling matters24, and that it might require much higher levels of education before a woman is exposed to ideas and strategies necessary for questioning gender inequality25. Similarly, whether gender equality increases after earning independent
income depends on whether they have control over it, and the preexisting power balance in the family26. There are also qualitative measures, but its use is less universal and limited due to difficulties in getting information and disagreements on a standard set of measures. This is because gender equality is a multi-faceted concept that measures many things. These includes measuring the legal and economic parity of women in society and marriage27, and measuring constraints like social institutions through laws, social norms, codes of conduct and traditions28. For the purposes of this paper, the difference between HDI and GDI scores (HDI-GDI) would be used as a proxy score for gender equality. The main reason is that a comparative analysis
requires the use of a measure that is easily obtainable. Though the criticisms of using quantitative measures are strong, comparing qualitative indicators is unrealistic due to the lack of data and commonly accepted qualitative measure. Moreover, HDI-GDI scores are truly global, and other ways of measuring gender equality have not met universal subscription and have very specific and limited usage, making it difficult to have any form of meaningful
comparison across countries. In addition, due to the limitations of this paper, an analysis of all the quantitative measure universally available is impossible. Using HDI-GDI helps as it includes the three indicators of income, education and life expectancy, hence encompassing a more holistic approach to measuring gender equality. This paper will circumvent the problem of generally increasing GDI scores by testing if the intensity of economic development (higher GDP growth rates, higher per capita increases in GDP and GNI, higher poverty reduction rates) corresponds with higher increases in HDI-GDI scores. If economic development does indeed increase gender equality, then higher rates of economic
development should show a higher increase in gender equality. For a static comparison, this paper would use per capita GDP, per capita GNI and poverty levels against HDI-GDI, and grouping countries according to their economic development indicators against HDI-GDI. For a comparison based on the rate of change of
economic development against the rate of change of gender equality, this paper would use the rate of change of per capita GDP, rate of change of per capita GNI, and rate of change of poverty levels against the rate of change of HDI-GDI, and grouping countries according to their economic development indicators against the rate of change of HDI-GDI. Lastly, countries would be grouped according to its political history, religious influence and geographical areas to see if these factors are related to HDI-GDI.
Data
Historical data for economic development indicators are found on the United Nations Statistics Division database online. Historical data for HDI and GDI can be found on the United Nations Human Development Reports online from 1996 onwards. The independent variables used are GDP growth rates, per capita GDP, rate of change of per capita GDP, per capita GNI, rate of change of per Capita GNI, poverty levels, and rate of change of poverty levels. Table 1 shows the GDP growth estimates. As there are no gender equality data for 1996, the GDP growth estimate for 1996 will be dropped. Hence, the GDP growth estimates for 1997 will be revised by the formula below.
GDP growth estimate for 1997 = 1996 GDP growth + 1997 GDP growth 2
Table 2 shows the revised GDP growth estimates applying the formula above. Table 3 shows the per capita GDP and the rate of change of per capita GDP in US$. The rate of change of per capita GDP in US$ is calculated as follows:
Rate of change of per capita GDP = current years per capita GDP previous years per capita GDP previous years per capita GDP
Table 4 shows the per capita GNI and the rate of change of per capita GNI in US$. The rate of change of per capita GNI in US$ is calculated as follows:
Rate of change of per capita GNI = current years per capita GNI previous years per capita GNI previous years per capita GNI
Table 5 shows the available figures of poverty levels and the rate of change of poverty levels. The rate of change of poverty is calculated as follows:
Rate of change of poverty levels = previous available years poverty levels subsequent available years poverty levels
The dependent variable used is Gender Equality. Table 6 shows the gender equality score and the rate of change of gender equality for each of the countries chosen. The gender equality scores would get smaller as gender equality increases in the country. If the rate of change is positive, it means gender equality is increasing, and vice-versa. The formulas for calculations are as follows:
Gender Equality = HDI scores GDI scores
10
Rate of change of Gender Equality = previous years Gender Equality current years Gender Equality
For comparisons of poverty reduction rates and the rate of change of gender equality, due to the lack of poverty reduction rates for every year, the rate of change of gender equality is calculated as follows:
Rate of change of Gender Equality = previous corresponding years Gender Equality subsequent corresponding years Gender Equality
Analysis of Data
GDP Growth Rates and Gender Equality Scores Table 7 shows GDP growth rates and the corresponding gender equality scores for each country each year. Figure 1 shows the relationship on a scatter plot. The wide dispersal of plots suggests that there seems to be no relationship between GDP growth rates and gender equality scores. Table 8 shows the countries grouped together according to their GDP growth rates and the corresponding averaged gender equality scores, and Figure 2 shows the relationship on a line chart. The results show that for GDP growth rates below 0% and more than 10%, the averaged gender equality scores are 0.0076 and 0.0060 respectively, whereas for GDP growth rates between 0% and 10%, the averaged gender equality scores range from 0.0130
11
Economic Development in Asia Research Paper to 0.0194, supporting the Boserup
Tan Zhiyang, Benson S8308207J approach that economic
development and gender equality has a U relationship. The U is inverted in this case as gender equality is measured using zero as the perfect gender equality
GDP Growth Rates and Rates of Change of Gender Equality Scores Table 9 shows the GDP growth rates and the corresponding rate of change of gender equality scores for each country each year. Figure 3 shows the relationship on a scatter plot. The tendency of the plots to remain near the x-axis, and the high instances of negative rates of change of gender equality scores despite an increase of GDP growth rates, suggests that there seems to be no relationship between GDP growth rates and the rates of change of gender equality scores. Table 10 shows the countries grouped together according to their GDP growth rates and the corresponding averaged rates of change of gender equality scores, and Figure 4 shows the relationship on a line chart. Likewise, results suggest that there seems to be no relationship between GDP growth groups and the averaged rates of change of gender equality scores.
12
Per capita GDP and Gender Equality Scores Table 11 shows the per capita GDP and the corresponding gender equality scores for each country each year. Figure 5 shows the relationship on a scatter plot. The results show that at low levels of per capita GDP, there is a wide and uniform dispersal of plots, suggesting that per capita GDP at the low levels does not affect gender equality. However, at the per capita GDP increases, the plots are uniformly near the X-axis, except for some outlying cases, suggesting that generally, as per capita GDP increases, gender equality would remain low, supporting the modernisationneoclassical approach Table 12 shows the countries grouped together according to their per capita GDP performance and the corresponding averaged gender equality scores, and Figure 6 shows the relationship on a line chart. The results show that gender equality scores are lowest when the country is in the upper middle-income bracket, supporting the Boserup approach that economic development and gender equality have a U shaped relationship.
Rates of Change of per Capita GDP and Rates of Change of Gender Equality Scores Table 13 shows the rates of change of per capita GDP and the corresponding rates of change of gender equality scores for each country each year. Figure 7 shows the relationship on a scatter plot.
13
The results show that the plots congregate near the X-axis, except for a few outliers, suggesting that the rates of change of per capita GDP do not affect the rates of change of gender equality scores. Table 14 shows the countries grouped together according to their rates of change of per capita GDP and the corresponding averaged rates of change of gender equality scores, and Figure 8 shows the relationship on a line chart. The results show that in times of negative rates of change of per capita GDP, the rates of change of gender equality scores is increasing, moving towards 0%. As the rates of change of per capita GDP increases from 0%, the rates of change of gender equality scores decreases, to a point where the rates of change of gender equality scores is negative at high rates of change of per capita GDP This suggests that economic development increases gender equality at a faster rate only at a point when the rates of change of per capita GDP is negative and rising towards 0%, supporting the modernisation-neoclassical approach. As economic development continues from where the rates of per capita GDP is positive and increasing, gender equality scores increases at a slower rate. Finally, the rates of change of gender equality scores turns negative as economic development is at the high stages; when the rates of change of per capita GDP is more than 20%. This supports the feminist approach that economic development decreases gender equality.
14
Per capita GNI and Gender Equality Scores Table 15 shows the per capita GNI and the corresponding gender equality scores for each country each year. Figure 9 shows the relationship on a scatter plot. The results show that at low levels of per capita GNI, there is a wide and uniform dispersal of plots, suggesting that per capita GNI at the low levels does not affect gender equality scores. However, at per capita GNI increases, the plots are uniformly near to the X-axis, except for some outlying cases, suggesting gender that generally, as economic high, development the
increases,
equality
remains
supporting
modernisation-neoclassical approach. Table 16 shows the countries grouped together according to per capita GNI and the corresponding averaged gender equality scores, and Figure 10 shows the relationship on a line chart. The results shows that there is no clear relationship between per capita GNI and gender equality scores, only that gender equality scores is highest when the country is in the upper middle-income bracket. This supports the Boserup approach that economic development and gender equality have a U shaped relationship.
Rates of Change of per capita GNI and Rates of Change of Gender Equality Scores Table 17 shows the rates of change of per capita GNI and the corresponding rates of change of gender equality scores for each
15
country each year. Figure 11 shows the relationship on a scatter plot. The results show that the plots congregate near the X-axis, except for a few outliers, suggesting that the rates of change of per capita GNI do not affect the rate of change of gender equality. Table 18 shows the countries grouped together according to their rates of change of per capita GNI and the corresponding averaged rates of change of gender equality scores, and Figure 12 shows the relationship on a line chart. The results show that in times of negative rates of change of per capita GNI, the rates of change of gender equality is increasing, moving towards 0%. As the rates of change of per capita GNI increases from 0%, the rates of change of equality decreases, to a point where the rates of change of gender equality is negative at high rates of change of per capita GNI This suggests that economic development increases gender equality at a faster rate only at a point when rates of change of per capita GNI is negative and rising towards 0%, supporting the modernisation-neoclassical approach. As economic development continues from where the rates of per capita GNI is positive and increasing, gender equality scores increases at a slower rate. Finally, the rates of change of gender equality scores seem to decrease as economic development is at the high stages; when the rates of change of per capita GNI is more than 20%. This supports
16
the feminist approach that economic development decreases gender equality.
Poverty Levels and Gender Equality Table 19 shows the available data for poverty levels for each country with the corresponding gender equality scores for the year. Figure 13 shows the relationship on a scatter plot. Results show a wide dispersal of plots regardless of instances of poverty,
suggesting that poverty levels do not affect gender equality. Table 20 shows the countries grouped together according to their poverty levels and the corresponding averaged gender equality scores. Figure 14 shows the relationship on a line chart. The group for poverty levels between 10% to 20% is discarded as there is only one data point. The results show that as poverty rates decrease, gender equality scores increases. This supports the feminist contention that as economic development increases, gender
equality decreases.
Poverty Reduction Rates and Rates of Change of Gender Equality Scores Table 19 shows the available data for the poverty reduction rates each country with the corresponding rates of change of gender equality scores for each available year. Figure 15 shows the relationship on a scatter plot. Results show that the plots hover
17
mostly above X-axis regardless of the poverty reduction rate, suggesting that poverty reduction rates do not affect gender equality. Table 21 shows the countries grouped together based on poverty reduction rates and the corresponding averaged rates of change of gender equality scores. Figure 16 shows the relationship on a line chart. The results show that the averaged rates of change for gender equality are negative for both periods of increasing poverty rates and poverty reduction rates above 20%. This suggests that economic development increases gender equality when the rate of change of poverty is moving from negative to a positive 10% rate, supporting the modernisation-neoclassical
approach. However, when the rate of change of poverty more than positive 10%, the rates of change of averaged gender equality scores is negative, supporting the feminist approach.
Summary of Key Results & Conclusion

Table 22 shows the summary of the findings. This paper shows that all the approaches are supported at one point or another, and therefore, the verdict of the relationship between economic development and gender equality is still out. In addition, whether the relationship supports one of the approaches or none at all depends on the economic indicators one uses, and on which stage of economic development one looks at.
18
This paper suggests that a generalizable economic theory explaining the relationship between economic development and gender equality should not be the end and focus of research in this area. More research needs to be done to discover why one approach is supported in one instance but another approach supported in another. This paper readily agrees that there are limitations inherent in this paper. Amongst some of this is the small sample size of nine countries spread over the breadth of Asia. Future research can embark on, if the information is available, a sampling all the Asian countries, or a sampling of Asian countries based on regions, religions, type of government, or other types of classifications, to come up with a more generalizable and better supported validation of the approaches mentioned. Another possible future research strategy would be to look at a few individual countries to see why one approach works in one country but another approach works in another. These strategies can focus on the institutions of the individual countries and the effect on gender equality, grouped according to similar experiences of economic conditions. Examples of research could include legal institutions and the instances of discriminatory laws against women, and social institutions affecting economic activities favouring men over women.
19
References
Bourne, Katherine L. & Walker, George M. Jr (1991), The
Differential Effect of Mothers Education on Mortality of Boys and Girls in India, Population Studies, 45(2): 203-209. Chen, Derek H. C. (2004). Gender Equality and Economic
Development: The Role for Information and Communication Technologies. World Bank Policy Research, Working Paper No. 3285. Retrieved on 1st February from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=610329# PaperDownload. CIA. (undated). The World Factbook. Retrieved on 7th April 2009 from factbook/. Dollar, David & Gatti, Roberta. (1999). Gender Inequality, Income and Growth: Are Good Times Good for Women? World Bank Policy Research Report on Gender and Development, Working Paper Series, No. 1. Retrieved on 7th April 2009 from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/wp1 .pdf. Esteve-Volart, Berta. (2004), Gender Discrimination and Growth: Theory and Evidence from India, Suntory and Toyota https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-
International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, London School of Economics and Political Science, DEDPS 42,
20
Economic Development in Asia Research Paper Retrieved on 21st May
Tan Zhiyang, Benson S8308207J 2007 from
http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/de/dedps42.pdf. Morrison, Christian & Jutting, Johannes. (2004). The Impact of Social Institutions on the Economic role of Women in
Developing Countries. OECD Development Centre Working Paper 234. Retrieved on 1st February 2009 from
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/43/31652310.pdf. Mukhopadhyay, Swapna & Sudarshan, Ratna M. (1997). Gender Discrimination and its Indicators: A Research Agenda, a revised and updated version of the theme paper: Gender
Discrimination in an age of Liberalization: Some Issues, Gender Discrimination Under Structural Reforms Workshop, Institute of Social Studies Trust. Retrieved on 29th May 2007 from india.org/PDF/A%20research%20agenda.pdf World Bank. (2009). Country Classification. Data and Statistics. Retrieved on 10th April 2009 from http://www.isst-
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTIC S/0,,contentMDK:20420458~menuPK:64133156~pagePK:6413 3150~piPK:64133175~theSitePK:239419,00.html. UNDP. (undated). Measuring Inequality: Gender-related
Development Index (GDI) and Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM). Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from
http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/indices/gdi_gem/
21
UNDP. (1996). Economic Growth and Human Development. Human Development Report 1996. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (1997). Human Development to Eradicate Poverty. Human Development Report 1997. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (1998). Consumption for Human Development. Human Development Report 1998. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (1999). Globalization with a Human Face. Human
Development Report 1999. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (2000). Human Rights and Human Development. Human Development Report 2000. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (2001). Making New Technologies Work for Human
Development. Human Development Report 2001. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from
22
http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (2002). Deepening Democracy in a Fragmented World. Human Development Report 2002. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (2003). Millennium Development Goals: A Compact Among Nations to End Human Poverty. Human Development Report 2003. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from
http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (2004). Cultural Liberty in Today's Diverse World. Human Development Report 2004. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (2005). International Cooperation at a Crossroads: Aid, Trade and Security in an Unequal World. Human Development Report 2005. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from
http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (2006). Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis. Human Development Report 2006. Retrieved on 8th April 2009 from
23
http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNDP. (2007). Fighting Climate Change: Human Solidarity in a Divided Retrieved World. Human on Development 8th April Report 2009 2007/2008. from
http://hdr.undp.org/xmlsearch/reportSearch?&k=&t=*&orderb y=year&c=*&y=*&p=1. UNSD. (2008). Estimates of per Capita GDP in US$. National Accounts Main Aggregates Database. Retrieved on 9th April 2009 from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/databases.htm. UNSD. (2008). Estimates of per Capita GNI in US$. National Accounts Main Aggregates Database. Retrieved on 9th April 2009 from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/databases.htm. UNSD. (2008). Estimates of Rates of Growth of GDP (In Percent). National Accounts Main Aggregates Database. Retrieved on 9th April 2009 from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/databases.htm. UNSD. (undated). Proportion of Population Below US$1 (PPP) per day. Millennium Indicators Database. Retrieved on 9th April 2009 from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/databases.htm. UNICEF (undated), Factsheet: Early Marriage. Retrieved on 25 th May 2007 http://www.unicef.org/protection/files/earlymarriage.pdf. from
24
Notes
1
Dollar, D. & Gatti, R. (1999). Gender Inequality, Income and Growth: Are Good Times Good for Women? 2 Chen, D. H.C. (2004). Gender Equality and Economic Development: The Role for Information and Communication Technologies. 3 Supra, note (1), at pp. 17. 4 Morrison, C. & Jutting, J. (2004). The Impact of Social Institutions on the Economic role of Women in Developing Countries, at pp. 6 & 8. 5 Esteve-Volart, B. (2004), Gender Discrimination and Growth: Theory and Evidence from India. 6 Bourne, K. L. & Walker, G. M. Jr (1991), The Differential Effect of Mothers Education on Mortality of Boys and Girls in India. 7 UNICEF (undated), Factsheet: Early Marriage, at pp. 1. 8 Supra, note (4), at pp. 8. Retrieved on 1st February 2009 from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/43/31652310.pdf. 9 Supra, note (2), at pp. 11. 10 Supra, note (4), at pp. 8 11 Supra, note (2), at pp. 13. 12 Supra, note (4), at pp. 8-9. 13 Ibid, at pp. 6 & 8. 14 Even though Pakistan is formally a federal republic since its independence in 1947, it has seen military rule three times lasting a total of thirty-three years. For more information, see Story of Pakistan found on http://www.storyofpakistan.com. 15 China and Vietnam are officially communist, and hence there is no state religion. South Koreas official census in 1995 shows 49% of the population choosing no religion as the answer. However, it is arguable that these countries experience a strong influence from Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism through history. 16 UNDP. (undated). Measuring Inequality: Gender-related Development Index (GDI) and Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM). 17 Mukhopadhyay, S. & Sudarshan, R. M. (1997). Gender Discrimination and its Indicators: A Research Agenda at pp. 3. 18 Supra, note (2), at pp. 5. 19 Ibid, at pp. 11. 20 Ibid, at pp. 5. 21 Ibid, at pp. 11. 22 Ibid, at pp. 4. 23 Supra, note (17), at pp. 13. 24 Ibid, at pp. 3. 25 Ibid, at pp. 4. 26 Ibid. 27 Supra, note (2), at pp. 11. 28 Supra, note (4), at pp. 8.
25

Economic Development and Gender Equality A Positive or Negative Relationship

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Economic Development and Gender Equality A Positive or Negative Relationship

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Economic Development in Asia Research Paper

Tan Zhiyang, Benson S8308207J