IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v35y2026i1p78-100..html

Gender gaps in the gig economy: consequences for entrepreneurship in the 21st century

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher J Boudreaux

Abstract

Although the gender gap in entrepreneurship has been well documented, we still know little about gender differences in gig work and freelancing activities, which continue to grow in importance. Using supply- and demand-side explanations, we hypothesize that gender differences will be smaller in the gig economy than in entrepreneurship. The primary reason is that the gig economy provides flexibility, which women find especially attractive relative to men. Using data from the Entrepreneurship in the Population survey, we find partial support for our hypotheses—relative to business ownership and nascent entrepreneurship, the gender gap is smaller for gig work but similar for freelancing. Moreover, if women do own a business or engage in freelancing, they are equally likely as men to remain entrepreneurs. Thus, the gender gap exists in entry but not exit. Our descriptive evidence suggests nonbinary individuals are more likely than men and women to use gig work as their primary job and more likely to remain business owners, but the regression results do not support these findings. We therefore find the gender gap in entrepreneurship is smaller in the gig economy than in other forms of entrepreneurship and smaller in exit.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher J Boudreaux, 2026. "Gender gaps in the gig economy: consequences for entrepreneurship in the 21st century," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 35(1), pages 78-100.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:35:y:2026:i:1:p:78-100.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtaf023
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    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:oup:indcch:v:35:y:2026:i:1:p:78-100.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.