IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lev/wrkpap/wp_859.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and Measuring Gender Inequality: A Technical Articulation for Asia-Pacific

Author

Listed:
  • Bhavya Aggarwal
  • Lekha S. Chakraborty

Abstract

Against the backdrop of the 2030 UN Agenda for Sustainable Development, this paper analyzes the measurement issues in gender-based indices constructed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and suggests alternatives for choice of variables, functional form, and weights. While the UNDP Gender Inequality Index (GII) conceptually reflects the loss in achievement due to inequality between men and women in three dimensions--health, empowerment, and labor force participation--we argue that the assumptions and the choice of variables to capture these dimensions remain inadequate and erroneous, resulting in only the partial capture of gender inequalities. Since the dimensions used for the GII are different from those in the UNDP's Human Development Index (HDI), we cannot say that a higher value in the GII represents a loss in the HDI due to gender inequalities. The technical obscurity remains how to interpret GII by combining women-specific indicators with indicators that are disaggregated for both men and women. The GII is a partial construct, as it does not capture many significant dimensions of gender inequality. Though this requires a data revolution, we tried to reconstruct the GII in the context of Asia-Pacific using three scenarios: (1) improving the set of variables incorporating unpaid care work, pay gaps, intrahousehold decision making, exposure to knowledge networks, and feminization of governance at local levels; (2) constructing a decomposed index to specify the direction of gender gaps; and (3) compiling an alternative index using Principal Components Index for assigning weights. The choice of countries under the three scenarios is constrained by data paucity. The results reveal that the UNDP GII overestimates the gap between the two genders, and that using women-specific indicators leads to a fallacious estimation of gender inequality. The estimates are illustrative. The implication of the results broadly suggests a return to the UNDP Gender Development Index for capturing gender development, with an improvised set of choices and variables.

Suggested Citation

  • Bhavya Aggarwal & Lekha S. Chakraborty, 2016. "The 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and Measuring Gender Inequality: A Technical Articulation for Asia-Pacific," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_859, Levy Economics Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:lev:wrkpap:wp_859
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_859.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sudhir Anand and Amartya Sen, 1995. "Gender Inequality in Human Development: Theories and Measurement," Human Development Occasional Papers (1992-2007) HDOCPA-1995-01, Human Development Report Office (HDRO), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
    2. Lekha Chakraborty, 2014. "Integrating Time in Public Policy: Empirical Description of Gender-specific Outcomes and Budgeting," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_785, Levy Economics Institute.
    3. Sudhir Anand & Martin Ravallion, 1993. "Human Development in Poor Countries: On the Role of Private Incomes and Public Services," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 133-150, Winter.
    4. Mark McGillivray & Howard White, 1993. "Measuring development? The UNDP's human development index," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(2), pages 183-192, March.
    5. Hicks, Norman & Streeten, Paul, 1979. "Indicators of development: The search for a basic needs yardstick," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 7(6), pages 567-580, June.
    6. Stephan Klasen & Dana Sch�ler, 2011. "Reforming the Gender-Related Development Index and the Gender Empowerment Measure: Implementing Some Specific Proposals," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 1-30, January.
    7. Angela Hawken & Gerardo Munck, 2013. "Cross-National Indices with Gender-Differentiated Data: What Do They Measure? How Valid Are They?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 111(3), pages 801-838, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lekha Chakraborty & Marian Ingrams & Yadawendra Singh, 2019. "Macroeconomic Policy Effectiveness and Inequality: Efficacy of Gender Budgeting in Asia Pacific," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_920, Levy Economics Institute.
    2. Chakraborty, Lekha, 2023. "Beyond GDP and Public Policies for Gender Equality: Gender Budgeting in Asia Pacific," Working Papers 23/404, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    3. Chakraborty, Lekha, 2019. "Federal fiscal policy effectiveness and Inequality: Empirical evidence on Gender Budgeting in Asia Pacific," Working Papers 19/273, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    4. Lekha Chakraborty, 2016. "Asia: A Survey of Gender Budgeting Efforts," IMF Working Papers 2016/150, International Monetary Fund.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aggarwal, Bhavya & Chakraborty, Lekha S, 2015. "Towards 2030 UN Agenda on Sustainable Development Goals: Technical Challenges in Measuring the Gender Inequality for Asia Pacific," MPRA Paper 67049, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Aggarwal, Bhavya & Chakraborty, Lekha, 2015. "Towards 2030 UN Agenda on Sustainable Development Goals: Technical Challenges in Measuring Gender Inequality in Asia Pacific," Working Papers 15/157, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    3. Berenger, Valerie & Verdier-Chouchane, Audrey, 2007. "Multidimensional Measures of Well-Being: Standard of Living and Quality of Life Across Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1259-1276, July.
    4. Jeni Klugman & Francisco Rodríguez & Hyung-Jin Choi, 2011. "The HDI 2010: new controversies, old critiques," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(2), pages 249-288, June.
    5. Fay, Marianne & Leipziger, Danny & Wodon, Quentin & Yepes, Tito, 2005. "Achieving child-health-related Millennium Development Goals: The role of infrastructure," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1267-1284, August.
    6. Ms. Janet Gale Stotsky & Sakina Shibuya & Ms. Lisa L Kolovich & Suhaib Kebhaj, 2016. "Trends in Gender Equality and Women’s Advancement," IMF Working Papers 2016/021, International Monetary Fund.
    7. Shyamal Chowdhury & Lyn Squire, 2006. "Setting weights for aggregate indices: An application to the commitment to development index and human development index," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(5), pages 761-771.
    8. Suman Seth & Antonio Villar, 2014. "Human Development, Inequality and Poverty: empirical findings," Working Papers 14.11, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    9. Gaëlle Ferrant, 2014. "The Multidimensional Gender Inequalities Index (MGII): A Descriptive Analysis of Gender Inequalities Using MCA," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 115(2), pages 653-690, January.
    10. Kanbur, Ravi & Squire, Lyn, 1999. "The Evolution of Thinking About Poverty: Exploring the Interactions," Working Papers 127697, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    11. Mark McGillivray, 2006. "Non-economic Well-being Achievement in Pacific Asia," Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 178-195.
    12. Sreenivasan Subramanian, 2004. "Indicators of Inequality and Poverty," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2004-25, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    13. Mark McGillivray & Farhad Noorbakhsh, 2004. "Composite Indices of Human Well-being: Past, Present, and Future," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2004-63, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    14. Klasen, Stephan & Villalobos, Carlos, 2020. "Diverging identification of the poor: A non-random process. Chile 1992–2017," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    15. Lekha Chakraborty, 2016. "Asia: A Survey of Gender Budgeting Efforts," IMF Working Papers 2016/150, International Monetary Fund.
    16. R. Frey & Fengxiang Song, 1997. "Human Well-Being in Chinese Cities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 77-101, September.
    17. Prof. Purusottam Nayak, 2005. "A Human Development Approach To The Status Of Development In North East India," General Economics and Teaching 0509003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Miles Cahill, 2005. "Is the Human Development Index Redundant?," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 31(1), pages 1-5, Winter.
    19. Pérez, Carlos Andrés & Burbano, Carolina & Londoño, Harold, 2017. "Compás Empresarial y de Competitividad No. 1 Regiones para vivir Índice Sintético de Calidad de Vida Departamental [Business and Competitiveness Compass No. 1 Regions to live Synthetic index of dep," MPRA Paper 89759, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Nov 2017.
    20. F. Noorbakhsh, 2002. "Human development and regional disparities in Iran: a policy model," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(7), pages 927-949.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Gender Inequality; Unpaid Work; Human Development; Composite Indicator;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
    • O15 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Economic Development: Human Resources; Human Development; Income Distribution; Migration

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:lev:wrkpap:wp_859. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Elizabeth Dunn (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.levyinstitute.org .

    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.