IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/ijsepp/v43y2016i7p692-721.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Globalization and women’s and girls’ health in 192 UN-member countries

Author

Listed:
  • Deniz Gevrek
  • Karen Middleton

Abstract

Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between the ratification of the United Nations’ (UN’s) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and women’s and girls’ health outcomes using a unique longitudinal data set of 192 UN-member countries that encompasses the years from 1980 to 2011. Design/methodology/approach - – The authors focus on the impact of CEDAW ratification, number of reports submitted after ratification, years passed since ratification, and the dynamic impact of CEDAW ratification by utilizing ordinary least squares (OLS) and panel fixed effects methods. The study investigates the following women’s and girls’ health outcomes: total fertility rate, adolescent fertility rate, infant mortality rate, maternal mortality ratio, neonatal mortality rate, female life expectancy at birth (FLEB), and female to male life expectancy at birth. Findings - – The OLS and panel country and year fixed effects models provide evidence that the impact of CEDAW ratification on women’s and girls’ health outcomes varies by global regions. While the authors find no significant gains in health outcomes in European and North-American countries, the countries in the Northern Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, Southern Africa, Caribbean and Central America, South America, Middle-East, Eastern Asia, and Oceania regions experienced the biggest gains from CEDAW ratification, exhibiting reductions in total fertility, adolescent fertility, infant mortality, maternal mortality, and neonatal mortality while also showing improvements in FLEB. The results provide evidence that both early commitment to CEDAW as measured by the total number of years of engagement after the UN’s 1980 ratification and the timely submission of mandatory CEDAW reports have positive impacts on women’ and girls’ health outcomes. Several sensitivity tests confirm the robustness of main findings. Originality/value - – This study is the first comprehensive attempt to explore the multifaceted relationships between CEDAW ratification and female health outcomes. The study significantly expands on the methods of earlier research and presents novel methods and findings on the relationship between CEDAW ratification and women’s health outcomes. The findings suggest that the impact of CEDAW ratification significantly depends on the country’s region. Furthermore, stronger engagement with CEDAW (as indicated by the total number of years following country ratification) and the submission of the required CEDAW reports (as outlined in the Convention’s guidelines) have positive impacts on women’s and girls’ health outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Deniz Gevrek & Karen Middleton, 2016. "Globalization and women’s and girls’ health in 192 UN-member countries," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 43(7), pages 692-721, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:ijsepp:v:43:y:2016:i:7:p:692-721
    DOI: 10.1108/IJSE-07-2014-0139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJSE-07-2014-0139/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJSE-07-2014-0139/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/IJSE-07-2014-0139?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.

    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:eme:ijsepp:v:43:y:2016:i:7:p:692-721. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.