IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/femeco/v30y2024i1p211-243.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender Differences in Opinions about Market Solutions and Government Interventions: The Case Of Uruguayan Economists

Author

Listed:
  • Verónica Amarante
  • Marisa Bucheli
  • Tatiana Pérez

Abstract

This article explores the differences in views between men and women Uruguayan economists regarding their opinions about market solutions and government interventions. In line with international evidence, the support for more market-oriented statements is lower among women than men. The study examines the role of age, family background, exposure to economic discussions (proxied by postgraduate education, reading of blogs and press, and academic environment), and personality traits (risk aversion, optimism, and preferences for competition) to explain these gender gaps. The results indicate that gender plays a role in shaping pro-market opinions. The gender differences remain significant after controlling for explanatory variables, though the magnitudes are mild. The findings indicate that achieving gender balance by including women in public debates and decision-making positions would improve the diversity of perspectives in economics.HIGHLIGHTSIn Uruguay, women economists are less pro-market than their men colleagues.Personal traits, notably competitiveness, contribute to this gender gap.Including women in decision making improves diversity and quality of public policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Verónica Amarante & Marisa Bucheli & Tatiana Pérez, 2024. "Gender Differences in Opinions about Market Solutions and Government Interventions: The Case Of Uruguayan Economists," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 211-243, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:30:y:2024:i:1:p:211-243
    DOI: 10.1080/13545701.2023.2262486
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13545701.2023.2262486
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13545701.2023.2262486?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:30:y:2024:i:1:p:211-243. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFEC20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.