Five Gender Gaps in the Labour Market

1. Five Gender Gaps in the Labour Market MoazamMahmood Director Economic and Labour Market Analysis Employment Policy Department ILO

2. Economic Indicators used in Gender-related Measures Source: Klasen (2013) • Limitations • Measurement of income: wage income often not well-estimated, non-wage income almost impossible to estimate especially in developing countries • Economic participation: limited representation of multiple dimensions (unemployment, employment-to-population, labour force participation rates) Not measuring the labour marketcorrectly and sufficiently Note: Sources of Indices GDI, GEM, GII – UNDP RSW, SIGE – Djikstra GGM, GEM3 – Klasen/Schüler GEI – Social Watch GGI – World Economic Forum GSI (AGDI) – UNECA

3. Global Employment Trends for Women 2012 Positive gender gap indicates that women are disadvantaged. Closing the gap, convergence, means moving towards zero. The report examines the conditions of women’s engagement in the labour market, by analysing the gender gaps for five indicators. • Unemployment Economic indicator of registered distress in the labour market • Employment-to-population ratio Assessment of employment growth rates and discouragement by gender • Labour force participation Demographic and behavioral indicator, indicating increase or decrease of different age groups to the labour market - Demographic change shows impact on the labour market, for example through more women in younger age cohorts dropping out of the labour force for education. - Behavioral change affects the labour market, for example by society and culture choosing to send more of its working-age women into the labour market. • Vulnerability • Sectoral and occupational segregation Economic indicators of job quality • Data and Time period • For the economic indicators (unemployment, employment, vulnerability, and segregation) the gaps are examined over the last decade, 2002-2012, with the focus on the crisis. • For the demographic and behavioral variable (labour force participation), gaps are examined over the past two decades (1992-2012) as it moves more slowly.

4. Global findings • Gender gap in unemployment • Constant in the period 2002 to 2007, but increased as an impact of the crisis from 2008 to 2012 • Gender gap in employment • Convergence in the period 2002 to 2007, but reversals coinciding with the period of the crisis from 2008 to 2012 in many regions • Gender gap in participation • Convergence in the 90s but constant in the 2000, with increasing gaps in some regions like South and East Asia, Central and Eastern Europe • Demographic and behavioral change adding, even over-riding, to the impact of the crisis • Gender gap in vulnerability, occupational segregation • Significant gap for 2012 • Sectoral segregation • Women crowding into service sector, in both developed and developing countries

5. 1. Gender gap in unemployment Figure: Global female and male unemployment, 2002-2017 0.7 pp Note: 2012 are preliminary estimates and 2013 onwards are preliminary projections. Source: ILO, Trends econometric models, July 2012. • Before crisis (2002-2007): gap in unemployment rates constant at 0.5 percentage points • Impact of crisis (2008-2012): increase of gap to 0.7 percentage points by 2012 (unemploying 13 million more women) • Projections show no reduction by 2017

6. 1. Gender gap in unemployment: regional variation Figure: Gender gap in unemployment rate by region, 2000-2012 Before Crisis (2002-2007) • Downward trend in the positive gap - Advanced economies - North Africa - South East Asia - Sub-Saharan Africa - South Asia • Increase in the positive gap - Middle East • Negative gender gap - Central and Eastern Europe - East Asia Impact of Crisis (2008-2012) • Reversal of convergence and increase in positive gap - South Asia - South East Asia - Africa • Convergence towards zero (from negative gaps) - Advanced economies - Central and Southern Europe • Unaffected by the crisis - Latin America and the Caribbean - Middle East - East Asia Regions with low gender gaps in unemployment rate Regions with high gender gaps in unemployment rate Note: 2012 are preliminary estimates. Source: ILO, Trends econometric models, July 2012.

7. 2. Gender gap in employment Table: Gender gap in employment-to-population ratios, 2002, 2007 and 2012 Note: 2012 are preliminary estimates; the gap equals the difference between male and female ratios. Source: ILO, Trends econometric models, July 2012. • • Before crisis (2002-2007): slight decrease in global gender gap by 0.2 percentage points • Decrease seen in… • - Developed Economies & EU - Middle East • - South-East Asia & the Pacific - North Africa • - Latin America and the Caribbean - Sub-Saharan Africa • • Impact of crisis (2008-2012): increase in global gap by 0.2 percentage points • Increase seen in… • - Central & South-Eastern Europe (non-EU) and CIS - South Asia • - East Asia - Middle East • → Can be explained by employment growth rates by gender

8. 2. Gender gap in employment Table: Global and regional employment growth rates by sex Note: 2012 are preliminary estimates; 2013–17 are preliminary projections. Source: ILO, Trends econometric models, July 2012. • Before crisis: Higher employment growth rate for women(smaller base) of 1.8%, compared to men at 1.6% → Decreasing gender gap in employment-to-population ratio • Impact of crisis: Fall of global female employment growth by more than men’s (especially South Asia) → Lower female growth rate for each year of the crisis up to 2012, and projected to continue → Increasing gender gap in employment-to-population ratio In advanced economies, women’s growth rate was lower than men’s over 2011-2012, and projected through 2017

9. 3. Gender gap in Labour force participation Figure: Distribution of female and male labour force participation rates, 1992 and 2012 In the long term, the global gender gap in labour force participation shows convergence in the last two decades. Note: n=number of countries; 2012 are preliminary projections. Source: ILO, EAPEP, 6th edition (July 2012 update).

10. 3. Gender gap in Labour force participation However, all the convergence progress was made in the first decade, 1990s. Table: Gender gap in labour force participation rate, by region, 2002, 2007 and 2012 Note: 2012 are preliminary estimates; the gap equals the difference between male and female ratios. Source: ILO, Trends econometric models, July 2012. • 1992 - 2002: Decrease in gap from 28% to 26% because male rates fell by more than women’s rates Gap decreasing or constant in all regions • 2002 - 2012: Constant gender gap because male and female rates fell equally, and regional variation Decrease seen in… - Developed economies & EU - South-East Asia and the Pacific - Latin America and the Caribbean - Middle East - North Africa - Sub-Saharan Africa Increase(reversal) seen in… - South Asia: 2 percentage points - Central & South-Eastern Europe (non-EU) and CIS: 0.6 percentage points - East Asia: 0.6 percentage points Account for the global halt in convergence in the participation gaps

11. 3. Gender gap in Labour force participation Age cohort decomposition • In the 1990s, female labour force participation rate has been decreasing in the last two decades for youth, and increasing for adults • In the 2000s, • Young female LFPR decreased in all regions • Adult female LFPR increased in all regions except East Asia, and South Asia Demographic changes and behavioral factors worked to reinforce the negative impact of the crisis. • Reversal of convergence in regions more hit by the crisis, such as the advanced economies and Central and Eastern Europe, as well as regions more hit by demographic and behavioral factors, such as South Asia and East Asia Further complexity: • Increase in LFPR gaps can be due to a desirable: young girls leaving the labour market for education. • Decrease in LFPR gaps can be due to an undesirable: pervasive and persistent poverty, not allowing an option of dropping out of work.

12. Persistent differentials in the quality of employment : vulnerability and segregation

13. 4. Gender Difference in vulnerability In 2012, vulnerability gaps are still pervasive, with a global gender gap at 2 percentage points. Figure: Share of status in total employment by region and sex, 2012 • Big regional differences in vulnerable employment gap Gap > 15 percentage points - North Africa - Middle East - Sub-Saharan Africa Gap < 10 percentage points - East Asia - South Asia - South-East Asia and the Pacific Share of women in vulnerable employment lower than men’s- Developed Economies & EU - Central & South-Eastern Europe and CIS • Decomposition of vulnerable employment - Share of own-account workers higher for men in all regions - Share of contributing family workers higher for women in all regions, leading to a higher dependency of women Note: 2012 are preliminary projections. The shares do not add up to 100 because the category for employers is not presented in the figure for the sake of a clear presentation. Source: ILO, Trends econometric models, July 2012.

14. 5. Gender segregation: Sectoral Sectoral segregation increased over time, with women moving into service sectors, in both developed and developing countries. Table: Employment shares by sector and sex, world and regions (%) 2012 snapshot 1/3 of women in agriculture, 1/2 in service, and 1/6 in industry Trends in the last two decades - Industrial share of women has barely changed: women moving out of agriculture into services - In advanced economies, women’s employment in industry halved, crowding 85% of them into services. - In most developing economies, women crowded out of agriculture into services, with the exception of East Asia where women’s employment in industry went up to a quarter. Source: ILO, Trends econometric models, July 2012.

15. 5. Gender segregation: Occupational Occupational segregation also appeared quite pervasive over time. • Men over-represented in craft and related trades workers, plant/machine operators, and managerial / legislative occupations. • Women concentrated in mid-skills occupations: clerks and service workers, and shop/market sales workers. Figure: Differences in average shares of major occupational groups by sex in selected developed and developing economies, latest year available after 2000 Note: The calculation of male–female differentials by occupation is as follows, using major group X: “share of persons employed in major group X in total employment, males” minus “share of persons employed in major group X in total employment, females”. Hence, a positive differential implies that men tend to be concentrated more in the specific occupation in comparison to women. The sample of developed economies comprises 25 countries, and the sample of developing economies 24 countries. Source: KILM, 7th edition, table 5a.