ContentServer Asp
ContentServer Asp
ContentServer Asp
2
Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stipulates that: “Everyone has the
right to education … and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit ...
Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strength-
ening of respect for human rights.”
3
We acknowledge the importance of other dimensions of women’s empowerment, such as
political participation, earnings and property rights protection. Eliminating gender disparity in these
areas is clearly necessary on grounds of human rights and, according to a large body of literature,
to promote development (Bandiera and Natraj, 2011). In this article, we focus on labour force par-
ticipation, which has often been regarded by international organizations as a first step towards im-
proving women’s living standards, and as a mechanism for increasing income and economic growth.
4
See Bandiera and Natraj (2011) for a summary of existing studies on gender inequality and
development, and their limitations. These authors suggest that most of the existing literature does
not adequately address issues related to reverse causality and omitted variables.
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 175
to explain why this has changed over time and why the gender gap in educa-
tion has closed and even reversed in many countries. In the case of the United
States, for example, the factors include the technological change that led to the
use of mechanical power rather than human energy in workplaces (Galor and
Weil, 2000), the rapid expansion of the service sector (Becker, 1992), the allevi-
ation of household chores through the use of piped water, electricity and appli-
ances (Killingsworth and Heckman, 1986; Greenwood, Seshadri and Yorukoglu,
2005; Goldin, 2006), greater ability to control pregnancies through access to birth
control technology, and lower “effort costs” of college preparation and attend-
ance for girls than for boys (Goldin, Katz and Kuziemko, 2006). The increase
in divorce rates and the decline in family size have also been suggested as cor-
relates and possible determinants of the reversal of the gender gap in education.
Higher educational attainment has allowed women to increase their ex-
pected lifetime labour force participation, shifting their time horizon. Accord-
ingly, their expected benefits from an increased investment in education have
led them to plan careers instead of “having jobs” and being the “secondary
worker” within the household (Goldin, 2006). Indeed, research shows that re-
turns to women’s education are in many countries either equal to or higher
than those accruing to men. Consequently, the opportunity cost of staying at
home increases with women’s level of educational attainment. It is important
to acknowledge the fact that cultural, social and political factors may also affect
women’s labour force participation, beyond. economic forces. Specifically, social
barriers (idem, 1990), cultural factors (e.g. Ilkkaracan, 2012; Beblo and Ortlieb,
2012), particular views on the role of women in society (e.g. Folbre, 1994) and
within the household (Badgett and Folbre, 1999), or formal restrictions (e.g.
Boserup, 1970) may limit women’s labour supply, even in situations where la-
bour market outcomes and returns to education are expected to be high.
Goldin (1990) shows how changes in income and wage elasticities can
affect women’s labour force participation, while Blau and Kahn (2007) exam-
ine trends in married women’s own-wage and cross-wage elasticities. They find
that in the United States from 1980 to 2000, married women’s own-wage elas-
ticity fell by about half and that their responsiveness to their husbands’ wages
declined by about 40 per cent. Heim (2007) also examines married women’s
labour supply elasticities in the United States, over the period 1979–2002, find-
ing that their wage and income elasticities for both participation and hours
decreased dramatically in absolute terms over the period.
Juhn and Murphy (1997) examine women’s employment and earnings
at different points of their husbands’ wage distribution from 1959 to 1989 and
find an increasingly weak relationship between women’s labour force partici-
pation and their husbands’ earnings. They also confirm a positive relationship
between women’s wages and labour force participation, casting doubts on the
idea that married women’s labour force participation increased to compensate
for slow growth in their husbands’ earnings. In addition to economic factors,
Fernandez (2007) shows how changes in culture and social norms, as part of
a rational intergenerational learning process, may have contributed to the in-
crease in married women’s labour force participation.
causality and possible omitted variables (e.g. Breierova and Duflo, 2004;
McCrary and Royer, 2011; Duflo, Dupas and Kremer, 2010).
Second, advances in household production technology have reduced the
time required for domestic production. In addition, advances in medical technol-
ogy have reduced the time budget associated with childbirth and parenting, while
effective birth control allows women to determine the size and timing of their
families and to respond rationally to market signals (Barker and Feiner, 2004).
Third, the shift of economic activity towards the service sector, the con-
sequent introduction of scheduled part-time employment, which is more “fe-
male friendly”, and the increase in returns to education have led to growth
in the labour force participation of married women and mothers (Goldin,
2006; Goldin, Katz and Kuziemko, 2006). This too has increased educated
women’s opportunity cost of staying out of the labour force (Attanasio, Low
and Sánchez-Marcos, 2009).
Data
The primary source we used to construct our data set is the International
Integrated Public Use Microdata Series, IPUMS-International (Minnesota
Population Center, 2009). This is the largest publicly available compilation
of individual-level census data, consisting of decennial records of individuals
and households. Our analysis is thus based on micro-level data for a selection
of 40 countries in Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America, as available, draw-
ing upon the two most recent waves of the census for each country.7 In most
cases, the interval between the two waves of the census is ten years. Appendix
table A1 lists the countries in our analytical samples and the census years for
each country. Our analysis focuses on the cohort of women and men aged
35–44 in order to concentrate on individuals who have finished their studies
and made their decisions on marriage, fertility and labour market participation.
Using the census data for each country, we measure several gender gaps,
namely:
• the education gap, defined as the difference in average years of education
between men and women;
• the labour force participation gap, defined as the share of men who are in
the labour force minus the share of women who are in the labour force –
i.e. employed or unemployed and job-seeking – or, where expressly noted
for the purposes of our analysis, as the ratio of those shares;8
• the marriage gap, defined as the difference in employment rates between
women who are married (or living in cohabitation) and single women
or, where expressly noted for the purposes of our analysis, as the ratio of
those rates;
• the motherhood gap, defined as the difference in employment rates be-
tween women without children and women with three or more children.9
7
We acknowledge that our sample is biased towards developing countries. However, we
were unable to add more developed countries by relying on other data sources because aggregate
statistics consistent with the variables and demographic groups we use are not available.
8
We use the employment status variable (EMPSTAT) from the IPUMS data set. Although
the variable has been harmonized to make work status comparable across countries and over time,
some differences remain in regard to terms of classification and reference group. A detailed descrip-
tion for each country and census wave is available at: https://international.ipums.org/international-
action/variables/EMPSTAT#comparability_tab [accessed 26 May 2014].
9
We also calculate an alternative measure of the motherhood gap defined as the differ-
ence in employment between women with children and women without children. Other studies
have examined the “family gap” by looking at the difference in earnings between women with
children and women without children, but all of them have focused on developed countries,
where the average number of children is lower (e.g. Sigle-Rushton and Waldfogel, 2007; Ander-
son, Binder and Krause, 2002; Waldfogel, 1998; Harkness and Waldfogel, 1999). Our measure
based on three or more children is intended to reflect the higher number of children born to
mothers in developing countries, which make up the majority of our sample, so that we have a
more comparable share of women in each group. However, robustness checks showed that the
basic results do not change depending on which definition of the motherhood gap we use in
terms of the number of children.
180 International Labour Review
10
Admittedly, the United States has had a more complicated history in this regard: be-
tween 1900 and 1930, women had roughly the same level of education as men (Goldin, Katz and
Kuziemko, 2006), then the gap widened and subsequently closed again for the cohorts born in the
1950s. None of the other countries in our sample displays such a reversal over time.
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 181
Figure 1. Year of birth of the first cohort to close the gender gap in education
Belarus (BY) 1945
Argentina (AR) 1946
Panama (PA) 1949
Colombia (CO) 1949
Philippines (PH) 1953
France (FR) 1953
Brazil (BR) 1953
Mongolia (MN) 1954
Kyrgyzstan (KG) 1955
Armenia (AM) 1955
Venezuela (VE) 1955
United States (US) 1956
Portugal (PT) 1956
Israel (IL) 1958
Costa Rica (CR) 1960
Canada (CA) 1961
Hungary (HU) 1963
Greece (GR) 1964
Spain (ES) 1967
Slovenia (SI) 1970
Chile (CL) 1972
Malaysia (MY) 1973
Viet Nam (VN) 1974
Jordan (JO) 1974
Ecuador (EC) 1974
Romania (RO) 1975
South Africa (ZA) 1975
Ghana (GH)
Uganda (UG)
Cambodia (KH)
India (IN)
Guinea (GN)
Bolivia (BO)
Iraq (IQ)
China (CN)
Occupied Palestinian Territory (PS)
Kenya (KE)
Rwanda (RW)
Austria (AT)
Mexico (MX)
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980
Notes: The gender gap in education is calculated as men’s average years of education minus women’s average
years of education for individuals born in a given year. The year of birth of the first cohort to have closed the
education gap in the most recent available wave of the census is indicated for each country. For countries where
no year is indicated, the gender gap in education was not yet closed at the time of the latest census for which
data are available.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
182 International Labour Review
Figure 2. Women’s average years of education and the educational gender gap,
most recent census wave
14
Women’s average years of education
CA US
12
HU AT
MN GR
PA IL RO
10
AR FR ES CL
CO US PH ZA
8 CR
PT EC MX
BR MY VE CN BO
6
IN
KE
4
UG
RW
2
GN
0
–0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Gender gap in education
Notes: The gender gap in education is calculated as described in figure 1, and averaged for individuals
aged 35–44. The country coding is given in figure 1.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
Figure 3. Change in the educational gender gap between the last two census waves
0.2
Initially narrow and widening Initially wide and widening
Gender gap change between
the last two census waves
UK IN
0
PH CL
PA AT
–0.2
AR CA ZA UG
FR GR MX
–0.4
BR CR HU CN
CO ES VE BO
–0.6 US EC
IL
PT MY
–0.8
RO
Initially narrow and narrowing Initially wide and narrowing
–1.0
–0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Gender gap in education (penultimate census)
Notes: The education gap is calculated as the difference in average years of schooling between men and women
aged 35–44. Two outliers, Guinea and Mongolia, have been excluded. The last two census years for each country
are given in Appendix table A1. The country coding is given in figure 1.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
gender gap is around two years or more (i.e. Uganda, Kenya, Bolivia and
India), women average 4–6 years of education. In some countries, like Bo-
livia and Mexico, where the gender gap has reversed in urban areas, it per-
sists among the indigenous population and in rural areas (Duryea et al., 2007).
Turning to the dynamics underlying these patterns, figure 3 plots the gen-
der gap in average years of schooling for the age group 35–44 in the penulti-
mate wave of the census against the change in the gap reflected in the most
184 International Labour Review
recent wave of the census. The gap is narrowing in the majority of countries.
One exception is India, where the initially wide gap does not appear to be nar-
rowing.11 Elsewhere, the reduction in the gender gap over the course of the
decade-long interval between the two waves of the census ranges from close
to zero to −0.8 years. Only Mongolia experienced a narrowing of the gap by
more than a year; we therefore excluded it from figure 3.
11
India’s most recent census, conducted in 2011, could present a shift in this pattern as the
gap appears to have narrowed in aggregate terms.
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 185
–20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Notes: The labour force participation gap is calculated as the share of men in the labour force (employed or
unemployed and job seeking) minus the share of women in the labour force for the age group 35–44.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
186 International Labour Review
US RO MX
0
HU KE UG
CN PA MY
UK IN
CA CL
RW FR CR
–10 BO CO EC
AT PT AR VE
GR IL
–20
BR ES
participation in the 1990s. In Brazil and Spain, the gap narrowed by more than
20 percentage points, displaying the greatest reductions observed across the
countries in the sample. Among the other countries with initial participation
gaps in excess of 30 per cent, Argentina, Venezuela, Israel and Greece experi-
enced reductions in the gap between 10 and 20 percentage points, whereas
Panama, Malaysia, India, Costa Rica, Chile, Ecuador and Colombia witnessed
more limited reductions, below 10 percentage points. Mexico, by contrast, ex-
perienced a widening of its labour force participation gap. Rwanda, which had
already closed its participation gap in the early 1990s, saw further reversal
of the gap in favour of women. In Viet Nam, Romania, South Africa and the
United States, the gap is widening, while it narrowed by less than 10 percent-
age points in the remaining countries.
Figure 6 suggests a U-shaped relationship between per capita GDP and
female labour force participation: women’s labour force participation rates
are indeed high (above 70 per cent) in countries like Rwanda, Guinea, Ghana
and Cambodia, whose annual GDP per capita is below US$1,500, but also in
countries like Austria, France, the United States and Canada, whose GDP per
capita exceeds US$22,000. Meanwhile, most middle-income countries exhibit
female labour force participation rates below 60 per cent. The level of GDP
per capita at which women’s participation is at its lowest is approximately
US$2,800.12 Iraq’s GDP per capita was close to US$2,747 in this period and
its female labour force participation was the lowest among the countries in
our sample, close to 14 per cent.
12
This observation is supported by the regression analysis results reported in Appendix
table A2.
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 187
Figure 6. Women’s labour force participation and GDP per capita (PPP)
100
CN BY
RW
90 GH KE
VN KG AT
KH AM FR
80 MN HU PT CA US
GN RO
ZA
70
IL
Women’s LFP rate
UG ES BR AR
60
GR
BO PA VE
50
CL
IN EC CO MX
PH MY
40
CR
30
JO
20
IQ
10
0
6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11
ln (GDP per capita)
Notes: The labour force participation rate (LFP) is calculated for women aged 35–44. The country coding is given
in figure 1.
Sources: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data. GDP data are from the World Development
Indicators.
Similarly, if we plot GDP per capita against the labour force partici-
pation gap, as shown in figure 7, we observe that the gap is smaller at lower
and higher levels of GDP per capita. Appendix table A2, however, provides
evidence that the relationship between female labour force participation and
GDP per capita is weaker after controlling for urbanization. These results
are consistent with earlier empirical studies which find that during the early
stages of economic development women’s labour force participation declines
as a result of the structural change (e.g. Sinha, 1967; Goldin, 1990 and 1994).
Specifically, the shift from an agriculture-based economy to expansion of the
modern sector leads to a decline in female participation in market-oriented
activities.13 Nevertheless, low-income countries with high female labour force
participation rates (e.g. Ghana, Guinea, Rwanda and Uganda) still exhibit a
gender gap in education (figure 1), while developed countries with equally
high female labour force participation rates have reversed the gender gap in
education and have a greater share of women employed in high-skilled urban
occupations (Canada, France and the United States).
We formalize this analysis by means of regressions that explore the rela-
tionship between GDP and the labour force participation gap. We also examine
13
In this case, labour force participation does not include home-based production of non-
marketed services.
188 International Labour Review
Figure 7. The labour force participation gap and GDP per capita (PPP)
100
80
LFP gap (men–women)
IQ
JO
60
IN CR MY
PH CO MX
EC CL
40 PA
BO VE GR
GN UG KH ES BR AR
KE AT
20 RO IL
CN VN ZA CA
KG AM PT FR
GH HU US
0 MN
RW BY
–20
6 7 8 9 10 11
ln (GDP per capita)
Notes: The labour force participation (LFP) gap is calculated as the difference between the percentages of men
and women aged 35–44 who are in the labour force. The country coding is given in figure 1.
Sources: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data. GDP data are from the World Development
Indicators.
the relationship between the labour force participation gap and the share of
the population living in urban areas, and a measure of labour market rigidity.
In table 2, column 1 shows that the log of GDP per capita and the log of GDP
per capita squared are significantly related to the gender gap in labour force
participation, confirming the relationship suggested by figure 7.14 Column 2
shows the regression results predicting the change in the gap from the previ-
ous census. As shown by the descriptive analysis above, the size of the gap in
the penultimate census is negatively related to subsequent change in the gap,
so that countries with a wider initial gap experience a narrowing of their gen-
der gap, indicating convergence. Change in the labour force participation gap
and the log of GDP per capita are positively related, suggesting a U-shaped
relationship between these two measures. Surprisingly, the regressions also
show that the gender gap in participation is narrowing more rapidly in coun-
tries with more rigid labour markets, suggesting that labour market policies
may have an impact on the speed at which this gap is changing – albeit not in
the direction that might have been expected.15
Finally, the gender gap in education is decreasing more rapidly in coun-
tries where a greater share of the population lives in urban areas (figure 8).
This appears to be related to the fact that after an initial decline in female la-
bour force participation, as economies develop further and become urbanized,
women’s education and the opportunity cost of staying out of the labour force
increase. Also, fertility rates decline, as do social barriers to market-based work,
The inclusion of urban-squared in the regression does not change the results.
14
The mean of the Employment Rigidity Index is 37.9 and the standard deviation is 16.9.
15
An increase in the Employment Rigidity Index of one standard deviation would lead to a reduc-
tion in the gap by 0.027 per cent, so the effect is relatively small.
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 189
Figure 8. The labour force participation gap and the rate of urbanization
100
80
LFP gap (men–women)
IQ
JO
60 EC
IN CR MX
PH MY PA CO CL VE
40
GR BO
GN ES BR AR
UG RO PT
20 IL
KH KG CN GH ZA AT FR
MN US
KE VN AM HU CA
0
RW BY
–20
0 20 40 60 80 100
Urbanization rate
Notes: The labour force participation (LFP) gap is calculated as the difference between the percentages of men
and women aged 35–44 who are in the labour force. The country coding is given in figure 1.
Sources: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data. The percentages of the population living in
urban areas are from the World Development Indicators.
0.8
AR IT
EG ES BR
IN BO
EC VE
0.6
CL CO PA
PH
MY
IQ JO CR MX
0.4
PS
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Female employment rate
Note: The marriage gap is calculated as the ratio of married to single women’s employment rates for the age
group 35–44. The country coding is given in figure 1.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
16
This is based on the IPUMS marital status variable, MARST, for which we use “married/
in union”. Our definition of “marriage” thus also includes cohabitation.
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 191
20
the last two census waves
BR
ES
15 GR
IL
10
AT FR ZA
CL EC
5 PT
VE IN BO RO
PA UG CA UK MN
CR CO CN
0
KE RW
MY GN
MX VN
–5
US
Initially wide and widening Initially narrow and widening
–10
–40 –35 –30 –25 –20 –15 –10 –5 0 5
Marriage gap (penultimate census)
Note: The marriage gap is the difference in employment rates between single and married women aged 35–44.
The change in the marriage gap is the percentage change in the marriage gap between the last two censuses,
for women aged 35–44. The country coding is given in figure 1.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
examples of such studies, see note 9 above). Empirical evidence has been
mainly limited to developed countries, where findings indicate that there is
a persistent family gap, though its size varies across countries (Harkness and
Waldfogel, 1999). Women with children are also less likely to work outside of
their home; and those who do so, work fewer hours.
Figure 11 ranks countries according to the size and sign of their mother-
hood gap. In most of the countries in our sample, women with children tend
to work less than women without children (hence the negative values of the
10
AT GR
KE
5 RW
CL VE UG
CO IL
0 PA
AR ZA
EC VN
CR CN
–5
RO
–10
HU
Initially wide and widening Initially narrow and widening
–15
–35 –25 –15 –5 5 15
Motherhood gap (penultimate census)
Notes: The motherhood gap is the difference between the employment rate of women with three children and the
employment rate of those with no children, for women aged 35–44. The country coding is given in figure 1.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
motherhood gap).17 The gap is widest in Chile, followed by Costa Rica and Ar-
gentina. However, there are several countries with a positive motherhood gap,
meaning that women with children work more than women without children.
In Rwanda, the positive gap is almost 10 per cent. Interestingly, Iraq and Oc-
cupied Palestinian Territory, which have the lowest female employment rates,
have positive motherhood gaps. Table 2, column 4, shows the regression re-
sults for the motherhood gap: there is no significant relationship between the
motherhood gap and GDP, urbanization, labour market rigidity, or women’s
overall labour force participation.
Lastly, figure 12 shows the changes in the motherhood gap across the
two census waves. Countries with a larger initial gap saw large changes in the
gap (e.g. Austria, Brazil and Greece) while countries with a positive mother-
hood gap in the penultimate census, like China, Viet Nam and South Africa,
witnessed very small changes.
Figure 13. The gender gaps in education and labour force participation
120
RW
110
100
MN HU CN
CA
90
LFP gap (women/men)
US VN KE
PT ZA AT
FR
80
IL RO GN
UG
70
BR ES
AR GR BO
60
VE PA
CO CL
50
PH EC MX MY IN
CR
40
30
20
–0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Gender gap in education
Notes: The gender education gap is the difference between men’s and women’s years of schooling for those aged
35–44. The labour force participation (LFP) gap is calculated as the proportion of women in the labour force
divided by the proportion of men in the labour force for individuals aged 35–44 (expressed as a percentage). The
country coding is given in figure 1.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
education on the horizontal axis and the gender gap in labour force partici-
pation on the vertical axis. There is no clear relationship between these gaps:
although the educational gender gap has reversed in many countries, the la-
bour force participation gap remains. For example, Argentina, Brazil, Colom-
bia, the Philippines, Panama and Venezuela have all reversed their educational
gender gap, but all of them still have labour force participation gaps between
40 and 70 per cent. Meanwhile, countries like China, Viet Nam and Kenya
have large education gaps, but small labour force participation gaps. Rwanda,
where women work more than men, has not reversed its gender gap in edu-
cation. The country-level regression results reported in column 1 of table 3
confirm that that, after controlling for other factors, the education gap is not
significantly related to the labour force participation gap.
As discussed earlier, these patterns may be explained by greater labour
force participation among low-skilled women in these countries. As mentioned
above, existing studies suggest that women’s labour supply follows a U-shaped
pattern during economic development (Sinha, 1967; Schultz, 1988; Goldin, 1990
and 1994; Mammen and Paxson, 2000). At very low levels of income, women
tend to have low-skilled jobs and long working hours; they are typically the
secondary earners in the household; and their work often plays the role of an
insurance. There is some disutility and social stigma attached to labour force
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 195
Observations 27 22 28 19 28 19 19
R-squared 0.425 0.505 0.907 0.865 0.518 0.751 0.753
Notes: Standard errors are given in parentheses. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1. Regressions are based on the meas-
ures described in the data section. The results do not change when including “Share urban-squared”.
Sources: Authors’ calculations from IPUMS-International data. GDP per capita and rates of urbanization are from the World
Development Indicators. The Rigidity of Employment Index (0=less rigid, 100=more rigid) is from the World Bank’s “Doing
Business” data set.
18
As mentioned in note 11 above, the latest wave of the Indian Census (2011) could show
a different pattern.
196 International Labour Review
Figure 14. Changes in the education gap and in the labour force participation gap
10
5
RO VN
MX
ZA US
0
KE HU UG
Change in LFP gap
MY PA
CN CA IN
–5
CR
BO FR
EC CL
–10
CO
PT VE AR AT
–15
IL GR
–20
ES BR
–25
–1.2 –1 –0.8 –0.6 –0.4 –0.2 0 0.2
Change in education gap
Notes: The gender education gap is the difference between men’s and women’s years of schooling for those aged
35–44. The labour force participation (LFP) gap is calculated as the male participation rate minus the female
participation rate for individuals aged 35–44. This graph is presented for those countries for which we have
information on both the education and the labour force participation gaps. The country coding is given in figure 1.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
1.4
IQ
Motherhood gap (ratio)
1.2
KE RW
EG UG ZABY
VN CN
KH GN IL GH
1 KG SI
BO
AR
PH BR RO
PA VE
0.8
EC GR AT FR HU
MX CO AR
CR
0.6
CL
0.4
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Marriage gap (ratio)
Notes: The motherhood gap is the ratio of working women with three children to working women with no children,
for women aged 35–44. The marriage gap is the ratio of married to single women’s employment rates, for women
aged 35–44. The country coding is given in figure 1.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on IPUMS-International data.
References
Abu-Ghaida, Dina; Klasen, Stephan. 2004. “The costs of missing the Millennium Development
Goal on gender equity”, in World Development, Vol. 32, No. 7, pp. 1075–1107.
Anderson, Deborah J.; Binder, Melissa; Krause, Kate. 2002. “The motherhood wage penalty:
Which mothers pay it and why?”, in American Economic Review, Vol. 92, No. 2 (May),
pp. 354–358.
Attanasio, Orazio; Low, Hamish; Sánchez-Marcos, Virginia. 2009. “Explaining changes in
female labour supply in a life-cycle model”, in American Economic Review, Vol. 98,
No. 4, pp. 1517–1552.
Badgett, M.V. Lee; Folbre, Nancy. 1999. “Assigning care: Gender norms and economic out-
comes”, in International Labour Review, Vol. 138, No. 3, pp. 311–326.
Bandiera, Oriana; Natraj, Ashwini. 2011. Does gender inequality hinder growth? The evidence
and its policy implications. Background Paper commissioned for the World Develop-
ment Report 2012: Gender equality and development. Washington, DC, World Bank.
Barker, Drucilla K.; Feiner, Susan F. 2004. Liberating economics: Feminist perspectives on
families, work, and globalization. Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan Press.
202 International Labour Review
Beblo, Miriam; Ortlieb, Renate. 2012. “Absent from work? The impact of household and work
conditions in Germany”, in Feminist Economics, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 73–97.
Becker, Gary S. 1992. The economic way of looking at life. Nobel Lecture, 9 Dec.
—. 1991. A treatise on the family. Expanded edition. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
—. 1981. A treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
—; Lewis, H. Gregg. 1973. “On the interaction between the quantity and quality of children”,
in Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 81, No. 2, Part 2: New economic approaches to
fertility (Mar.–Apr.), pp. S279–S288.
—; Murphy, Kevin M.; Tamura, Robert. 1990. “Human capital, fertility, and economic growth”,
in Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 98, No. 5, Part 2: The problem of development: A
conference of the Institute for the Study of Free Enterprise Systems (Oct.), pp. S12–S37.
Behrman, Jere R.; Deolalikar, Anil B. 1988. “Health and nutrition”, in Hollis Chenery and
T.N. Srinivasan (eds): Handbook of Development Economics. Volume 1. Amsterdam,
North Holland, pp. 631–711.
Benería, Lourdes; Sen, Gita. 1986. “Accumulation, reproduction, and women’s role in economic
development: Boserup revisited”, in Eleanor Leacock and Helen I. Safa (eds): Women’s
work. South Hadley, MA, Bergin and Garvey Publishers, pp. 141–157.
—; —. 1982. “Class and gender inequalities and women’s role in economic development:
Theoretical and practical implications”, in Feminist Studies, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 157–176.
Blau, Francine D.; Kahn, Lawrence M. 2007. “Changes in the labor supply behavior of married
women: 1980–2000”, in Journal of Labor Economics, Vol. 25, No. 3 (July), pp. 393–438.
Blinder, Alan S. 1973. “Wage discrimination: Reduced form and structural estimates”, in
Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 436–455.
Boserup, Ester. 1970. Woman’s role in economic development. New York, NY, St Martin’s Press.
Bowen, William G.; Finegan, T. Aldrich. 1969. The economics of labour force participation.
Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.
Breierova, Lucia; Duflo, Esther. 2004. The impact of education on fertility and child mor-
tality: Do fathers really matter less than mothers? NBER Working Paper No. 10513.
Cambridge, MA, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Caldwell, John C. 1982. Theory of fertility decline. London, Academic Press.
Dancer, Diane; Rammohan, Anu; Smith, Murray D. 2008. “Infant mortality and child nutri-
tion in Bangladesh”, in Health Economics, Vol. 17, No. 9, pp. 1015–1035.
Dollar, David; Gatti, Roberta. 1999. Gender inequality, income, and growth: Are good times
good for women? Policy Research Report on Gender and Development Working Paper
Series, No. 1. Washington, DC, World Bank. May.
Duflo, Esther; Dupas, Pascaline; Kremer, Michael. 2010. Education and fertility: Experimen-
tal evidence from Kenya. MIT unpublished mimeo. Cambridge, MA, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology.
Duryea, Suzanne; Galiani, Sebastian; Ñopo, Hugo; Piras, Claudia. 2007. The educational
gender gap in Latin America and the Caribbean. Research Department Working Paper
No. 600. Washington, DC, Inter-American Development Bank.
Elson, Diane. 1999. “Labour markets as gendered institutions: Equality, efficiency and em-
powerment issues”, in World Development, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 611–627.
Fernandez, Raquel. 2007. Culture as learning: The evolution of female labour force participa-
tion over a century. NBER Working Paper No. 13373. Cambridge, MA, National Bureau
of Economic Research.
Folbre, Nancy. 1994. “Children as public goods”, in American Economic Review, Vol. 84,
No. 2 (May), pp. 86–90.
—. 1986. “Cleaning house: New perspectives on households and economic development”, in
Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 5–40.
Fortin, Nicole; Lemieux, Thomas; Firpo, Sergio. 2010 “Decomposition methods in econom-
ics”, in David Card and Orley C. Ashenfelter (eds): Handbook of Labor Economics.
Volume 4A. Amsterdam, North Holland, pp. 1–102.
Galor, Oded; Weil, David N. 2000. “Population, technology, and growth: From Malthusian
stagnation to the demographic transition and beyond”, in American Economic Review,
Vol. 90, No. 4 (Sep.), pp. 806–828.
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 203
—; —. 1996. “The gender gap, fertility, and growth”, in American Economic Review, Vol. 86,
No. 3 (June), pp. 374–387.
Glewwe, Paul. 2000. “Why does mother’s schooling raise child health in developing countries?
Evidence from Morocco”, in Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 124–159.
Glick, Peter. 2008. “What policies will reduce gender schooling gaps in developing countries:
Evidence and interpretation”, in World Development, Vol. 36, No. 9, pp. 1623–1646.
Goldin, Claudia. 2006. “The quiet revolution that transformed women’s employment, educa-
tion, and family”, in American Economic Review, Vol. 96, No. 2, pp. 1–21.
—. 1994. The U-shaped female labor force function in economic development and economic
history. NBER Working Paper No 4707. Cambridge, MA, National Bureau of Eco-
nomic Research.
—. 1990. Understanding the gender gap: An economic history of American women. New York,
NY, Oxford University Press.
—; Katz, Lawrence F.; Kuziemko, Ilyana. 2006. “The homecoming of American college women:
The reversal of the college gender gap”, in Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 20,
No. 4, pp. 133–156.
Greenwood, Jeremy; Seshadri, Ananth; Yorukoglu, Mehmet. 2005. “Engines of liberation”,
in Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 72, No. 1 (Jan.), pp. 109–133.
Harkness, Susan; Waldfogel, Jane. 1999. The family gap in pay: Evidence from seven industri-
alised countries. CASEpaper No. 29. London, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion,
London School of Economics.
Hausmann, Ricardo; Ganguli, Ina; Viarengo, Martina. 2009. “Box 1. The dynamics of the gender
gap: How do countries rank in terms of making marriage and motherhood compatible
with work?” in Ricardo Hausmann, Laura D. Tyson and Saadia Zahidi (eds): Global
Gender Gap Report 2009. Geneva, World Economic Forum, pp. 27–29.
Heim, Bradley T. 2007. “The incredible shrinking elasticities: Married female labor supply,
1978–2002”, in Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 881–918.
Huisman, Janine; Smits, Jeroen. 2009. “Effects of household- and district-level factors on pri-
mary school enrollment in 30 developing countries”, in World Development, Vol. 37,
. No. 1,.pp. 179–193.
Ilkkaracan, Ipek. 2012. “Why so few women in the labor market in Turkey?”, in Feminist
Economics, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 1–37.
Juhn, Chinhui; Murphy, Kevin M. 1997. “Wage inequality and family labor supply”, in Journal
of Labor Economics, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 72–97.
Killingsworth, Mark R.; Heckman, James J. 1986. “Female labor supply: A survey”, in Orley
C. Ashenfelter and Richard Layard (eds): Handbook of Labor Economics. Volume 1.
Amsterdam, North Holland, pp. 103–204.
Kingdon, Geeta Ghandi. 2002. “Women, education and development”, in Seena Fazel and
John Danesh (eds): Reason and revelation: Studies in the Babi and Baha’i religions.
Volume 13. Los Angeles, CA, Kalimat Press, pp. 231–243.
Klasen, Stephan. 1999. Does gender inequality reduce growth and development? Evidence
from cross-country regressions. Policy Research Report on Gender and Development
Working Paper Series, No. 7. Washington, DC, World Bank.
Lam, David; Duryea, Suzanne. 1999. “Effects of schooling on fertility, labor supply and invest-
ments in children, with evidence from Brazil”, in Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 34,
No. 1, pp. 160–192.
Machado, José A.F.; Mata, José. 2005. “Counterfactual decomposition of changes in wage
distributions using quantile regression”, in Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 20,
No. 4 (May), pp. 445–465.
Mammen, Kristin; Paxson, Christina. 2000. “Women’s work and economic development”, in
Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 141–164.
McCrary, Justin; Royer, Heather. 2011. “The effect of female education on fertility and infant
health: evidence from school entry policies using exact date of birth”, in American Eco-
nomic Review, Vol. 101, No. 1, pp. 158–195.
Mincer, Jacob. 1974. Schooling, experience, and earnings. New York, NY, Columbia University
Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.
204 International Labour Review
—. 1962. “Labor force participation of married women: A study of labor supply”, in H. Gregg
Lewis (ed.): Aspects of Labor Economics: A Conference of the Universities-National
Bureau Committee for Economic Research. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press,
pp. 63–97.
Minnesota Population Center. 2011. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series, International:
Version 6.1 [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis, MN, University of Minnesota.
—. 2009. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series, International: Version 5.0 [Machine-readable
database]. Minneapolis, MN, University of Minnesota.
Oaxaca, Ronald. 1973. “Male-female wage differentials in urban labor markets”, in Inter-
national Economic Review, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 693–709.
Osili, Una Okonkwo; Long, Bridget Terry. 2008. “Does female schooling reduce fertility? Evi-
dence from Nigeria”, in Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 87, No. 1, pp. 57–75.
Pritchett, Lant. 2006. “Does learning to add up add up? The returns to schooling in aggregate
data”, in Eric Hanuschek and Finis Welch (eds): Handbook of the Economics of Edu-
cation. Volume 1. Amsterdam, North Holland, pp. 636–695.
—. 2001. “Where has all the education gone?”, in World Bank Economic Review, Vol. 15,
No. 3, pp. 367–391.
Schultz, T. Paul. 2002. “Why governments should invest more to educate girls”, in World Devel-
opment, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 207–225.
—. 1988. “Education investments and returns”, in Hollis Chenery and T.N. Srinivasan (eds):
Handbook of Development Economics. Volume 1. Amsterdam, North Holland,
pp. 543–630.
Sigle-Rushton, Wendy; Waldfogel, Jane. 2007. “Motherhood and women’s earnings in Anglo-
American, continental European, and Nordic countries”, in Feminist Economics,
Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 55–91.
Sinha, Jania N. 1967. “Dynamics of female participation in economic activity in a develop-
ing economy”, in United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (ed.):
Proceedings of the World Population Conference, Belgrade, 30 Aug.–10 Sep. 1965.
Volume 4. New York, NY, pp. 336–337.
Smith, J.P.; Ward, M.P. 1985. “Time series growth in the female labour force”, in Journal of
Labour Economics, Vol. 3, pp. 59–90.
Stanley, T. D.; Jarrell, Stephen B. 1998. “Gender wage discrimination bias? A meta-regression
analysis”, in Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 947–973.
Strauss, John; Thomas, Duncan. 1995. “Human resources: Empirical modelling of household
and family decisions”, in Jere Behrman and T.N. Srinivasan (eds): Handbook of Devel-
opment Economics. Volume 3A. Amsterdam, North Holland, pp. 1883–2023.
Sundaram, Aparna; Vanneman, Reeve. 2008. “Gender differentials in literacy in India: The
intriguing relationship with women’s labor force participation”, in World Development,
Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 128–143.
Waldfogel, Jane. 1998. “Understanding the ‘family gap’ in pay for women with children”, in
Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 137–156.
Weichselbaumer, Doris; Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf. 2005. “A meta-analysis of the international
gender wage gap”, in Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 479–511.
Willis, Robert J. 1973. “A new approach to the economic theory of fertility behavior”, in Jour-
nal of Political Economy, Vol. 81, No. 2, Part 2: New economic approaches to fertility
(Mar.–Apr.), pp. S14–S64.
World Bank. 2012. “Girls’ education”, available at: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/
search?q=cache:KWGahOkVnpYJ:web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOP
ICS/EXTEDUCATION/0,,contentMDK:20298916~menuPK:617572~pagePK:148956
~piPK:216618~theSitePK:282386,00.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk [accessed 20 June
2014]. Washington, DC.
—. 2011a. Doing Business Measuring Business Regulations, see “historical data sets and trends
data”. Washington, DC. Available at: http://www.doingbusiness.org [accessed 26 May
2014].
—. 2011b. World Development Report 2012: Gender equality and development. Washington, DC.
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 205
Appendix
Table A1. Analytical sample
Sample 1 Sample 2
Latest wave of the census Penultimate and latest waves
of the census
Observations 38 38 38 38
R-squared 0.251 0.311 0.312 0.313
Notes: Standard errors are given in parentheses. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1.
Sources: Authors’ calculations from IPUMS-International data. Regressions are based on the gender gap meas-
ures described in the data section. GDP per capita and level of urbanization are from the World Development
Indicators. The Rigidity of Employment Index (0=less rigid, 100=more rigid) is from the World Bank’s Doing Busi-
ness data set.
The gender gaps in education and labour force participation 207
Figure A1. Alternative definition of the motherhood gap (latest census wave)
Argentina (AR)
Chile (CL)
Costa Rica (CR)
Mexico (MX)
Panama (PA)
Ecuador (EC)
Venezuela (VE)
Philippines (PH)
Colombia (CO)
Brazil (BR)
Austria (AT)
Greece (GR)
Bolivia (BO)
Armenia (AM)
Iraq (IQ)
Occupied Palestinian Territory (PS)
Hungary (HU)
Romania (RO)
Israel (IL)
Guinea (GN)
Cambodia (KH)
South Africa (ZA)
Uganda (UG)
Viet Nam (VN)
Slovenia (SI)
Kyrgyzstan (KG)
China (CN)
Belarus (BY)
Ghana (GH)
Kenya (KE)
Rwanda (RW)
–0.25 –0.20 –0.15 –0.10 –0.05 0 0.05 0.10 0.15
Notes: For this definition of the motherhood gap, we calculate the difference between the employment rate of
women with any children and the employment rate of those with no children, for women aged 35–44.
Source: Authors’ calculations from IPUMS-International data.
Copyright of International Labour Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.