Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/top/female.html
Female representation in Economics, as of May 2018
Overall, 10196 of 53227 economists are female, or a proportion of 19.1%.
Listings by
Each table can be sorted by clicking on table headers.Female representation in Economics by country
Attribution to country is based on affiliations. For economists with multiple affiliations, affiliation shares set by the economist are considered.| Country | # authors | # female | share(%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 281.94 | 66.99 | 23.7 |
| Australia | 1369.63 | 223.26 | 16.3 |
| Austria | 406.98 | 67.57 | 16.6 |
| Bangladesh | 86.01 | 1.5 | 1.7 |
| Belgium | 706.42 | 144.11 | 20.4 |
| Bolivia | 57.47 | 10.5 | 18.2 |
| Brazil | 687.83 | 88.77 | 12.9 |
| Bulgaria | 150.31 | 57.42 | 38.1 |
| Canada | 1455.64 | 212.35 | 14.5 |
| Chile | 394.55 | 52.2 | 13.2 |
| China | 908.41 | 53.64 | 5.9 |
| Colombia | 565.63 | 114.68 | 20.2 |
| Croatia | 115.5 | 41 | 35.4 |
| Czech Republic | 368.72 | 97.35 | 26.4 |
| Denmark | 378.18 | 69.55 | 18.3 |
| Egypt | 61.09 | 13.22 | 21.6 |
| Finland | 220.1 | 35.78 | 16.2 |
| France | 3214.99 | 841.75 | 26.1 |
| Germany | 3128.05 | 647.26 | 20.6 |
| Ghana | 65.27 | 2.5 | 3.8 |
| Greece | 456.28 | 68.08 | 14.9 |
| Hong Kong | 140.35 | 16 | 11.3 |
| Hungary | 261.19 | 59.49 | 22.7 |
| India | 760.72 | 45.3 | 5.9 |
| Indonesia | 216.04 | 12.88 | 5.9 |
| Iran | 88.88 | 4 | 4.5 |
| Ireland | 246.69 | 67.81 | 27.4 |
| Israel | 173.22 | 10 | 5.7 |
| Italy | 2775.3 | 839.07 | 30.2 |
| Japan | 1000.84 | 46.68 | 4.6 |
| Luxembourg | 135.57 | 21.09 | 15.5 |
| Malaysia | 263.27 | 16.9 | 6.4 |
| Mexico | 335.67 | 49.69 | 14.8 |
| Morocco | 50.06 | 2.99 | 5.9 |
| Netherlands | 1031.48 | 162.11 | 15.7 |
| New Zealand | 240.85 | 40.78 | 16.9 |
| Nigeria | 128.62 | 8.33 | 6.4 |
| Norway | 395.75 | 51.69 | 13 |
| Pakistan | 356.73 | 34.98 | 9.8 |
| Peru | 200.48 | 25 | 12.4 |
| Philippines | 109.53 | 28.48 | 26 |
| Poland | 520.03 | 156.6 | 30.1 |
| Portugal | 597.52 | 205.41 | 34.3 |
| Romania | 1060.44 | 553.52 | 52.1 |
| Russia | 1076.94 | 409.27 | 38 |
| Saudi Arabia | 57.66 | 1.05 | 1.8 |
| Singapore | 177.35 | 17 | 9.5 |
| Slovakia | 83.86 | 20.85 | 24.8 |
| South Africa | 271.67 | 51.75 | 19 |
| South Korea | 297.59 | 4 | 1.3 |
| Spain | 2049.59 | 562.02 | 27.4 |
| Sweden | 652.76 | 135.79 | 20.8 |
| Switzerland | 853.43 | 150.03 | 17.5 |
| Taiwan | 199.12 | 15.25 | 7.6 |
| Thailand | 96.16 | 5.04 | 5.2 |
| Tunisia | 197.65 | 24.34 | 12.3 |
| Turkey | 744.42 | 83.03 | 11.1 |
| United Arab Emirates | 60.66 | 9.5 | 15.6 |
| United Kingdom | 3355.56 | 613.04 | 18.2 |
| Ukraine | 147 | 38.84 | 26.4 |
| Uruguay | 106.2 | 36.29 | 34.1 |
| United States | 10060.65 | 1620.39 | 16.1 |
| Viet Nam | 83.94 | 20.95 | 24.9 |
Female representation in Economics by US state
Attribution to state is based on affiliations. For economists with multiple affiliations, affiliation shares set by the economist are considered.Female representation in Economics by field
Field is determined by the proportion of papers announced through NEP that are in a particular field. Note that a paper may be is several fields.Female representation in Economics by cohort
Cohort is based on information listed in the RePEc Genealogy.| Cohort | # authors | # female | share (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1973 | 52 | 4 | 7.6 |
| 1974 | 54 | 1 | 1.8 |
| 1975 | 67 | 2 | 2.9 |
| 1976 | 72 | 4 | 5.5 |
| 1978 | 63 | 4 | 6.3 |
| 1979 | 54 | 3 | 5.5 |
| 1980 | 74 | 3 | 4 |
| 1981 | 85 | 2 | 2.3 |
| 1982 | 79 | 6 | 7.5 |
| 1983 | 106 | 8 | 7.5 |
| 1984 | 79 | 8 | 10.1 |
| 1985 | 106 | 4 | 3.7 |
| 1986 | 120 | 14 | 11.6 |
| 1987 | 116 | 11 | 9.4 |
| 1988 | 140 | 21 | 15 |
| 1989 | 140 | 14 | 10 |
| 1990 | 151 | 10 | 6.6 |
| 1991 | 167 | 16 | 9.5 |
| 1992 | 168 | 21 | 12.5 |
| 1993 | 188 | 24 | 12.7 |
| 1994 | 158 | 25 | 15.8 |
| 1995 | 210 | 31 | 14.7 |
| 1996 | 233 | 31 | 13.3 |
| 1997 | 216 | 30 | 13.8 |
| 1998 | 255 | 43 | 16.8 |
| 1999 | 280 | 47 | 16.7 |
| 2000 | 360 | 57 | 15.8 |
| 2001 | 325 | 64 | 19.6 |
| 2002 | 343 | 59 | 17.2 |
| 2003 | 333 | 56 | 16.8 |
| 2004 | 328 | 52 | 15.8 |
| 2005 | 374 | 70 | 18.7 |
| 2006 | 369 | 73 | 19.7 |
| 2007 | 419 | 75 | 17.8 |
| 2008 | 443 | 76 | 17.1 |
| 2009 | 445 | 85 | 19.1 |
| 2010 | 424 | 85 | 20 |
| 2011 | 370 | 70 | 18.9 |
| 2012 | 377 | 58 | 15.3 |
| 2013 | 301 | 56 | 18.6 |
| 2014 | 264 | 46 | 17.4 |
| 2015 | 213 | 43 | 20.1 |
| 2016 | 142 | 19 | 13.3 |
| 2017 | 102 | 16 | 15.6 |
The data presented here is experimental. It is based on a limited sample of the research output in Economics and Finance. Only material catalogued in RePEc is considered. For any citation based criterion, only works that could be parsed by the CitEc project are considered. For any ranking of people, only those registered with the RePEc Author Service can be taken into account. And for rankings of institutions, only those listed in EDIRC and claimed as affiliation by the respective, registered authors can be measured. Thus, this list is by no means based on a complete sample. You can help making this more comprehensive by encouraging more publications to be listed (instructions) and more authors to register (form). For more details on the various rankings that are available as well for documentation, follow this link.
Credits:
- Citations from CitEc project by José Manuel Barrueco Cruz, University of Valencia, Spain. Hardware provided by Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas (IVIE), Valencia, Spain.
- Abstract views and downloads statistics from LogEc project by Sune Karlsson, Örebro University, Sweden.
- Author registration by Ivan Kumanov, Minsk, Belarus.
- Institutions database and ranking computations by Christian Zimmermann, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
- RePEc has been initiated by Thomas Krichel.