Introduction
Inequalities in political representation, educational attainment, and labor market involvement are some of the ways that gender inequality persists in global economies. Women’s experiences in the real-world show that sexism and gender discrimination remain despite historical and legislative attempts toward equality (Caven et al., 2021). Structural disparities nevertheless impede women’s economic empowerment and contribute to persistent economic inefficiencies, even in the face of notable progress in many places (Silva & Klasen, 2021). Knowing these differences identifies areas of social injustice as well as unrealized economic potential by the reason of gender biases.
Gender disparity in economic situations can result in distorted labor markets where women are disproportionately concentrated in lower-paying industries, routinely underpaid, and underrepresented in leadership roles. Disparities in women’s access to and quality of education relative to men might restrict their professional options and perpetuate gender norms in the field of education (United Nations, 2022). Moreover, gender disparities continue to exist in political representation, which has a serious impact on the development of gender-specific issues and policies. Given how many industries are interconnected, gender disparity in one can exacerbate problems in another, resulting in a complicated mesh of social and economic dilemmas.
This study uses a large data collection that spans several sectors and locations to investigate gender inequality using a thorough econometric methodology. An in-depth clasp of how gender disparity affects different economic outcomes, such as employment participation, wage gaps, and educational attainment, will be possible by dint of the econometric study. Through the integration of these components, the research seeks to both define the characteristics of gender disparity and provide guidance for policy measures that have the potential to greatly enhance social justice and economic efficiency. This research is significant since it can give stakeholders and policymakers assiduously, empirically supported insights into the mechanisms being the basis of gender inequality. Doing this is expected to promote a better understanding of how specific policy measures might lessen these differences and, in due course, lead to more strong and equitable economic growth.
Literature Review
Economic Impact of Gender Inequality
Studies regularly demonstrate the negative impact of gender inequality on macroeconomic performance. According to Silva & Klasen (2021), discriminatory practices directed towards women in the workplace, political sphere, and educational establishments not only compromise social fairness but also obstruct economic progress. They contend that differences between the sexes in terms of work and pay lead to an ineffective distribution of resources, which lowers potential growth and productivity in the economy. Comparably, research from a panel of 105 developing nations by Altuzarra et al. (2021) demonstrates that advancements in gender equality in education have a direct impact on economic growth. These studies show why correcting gender gaps is economically justified, arguing that treating all genders equally can spur substantial economic growth.
Sector-Specific Gender Disparities
Different sectors experience gender inequality in different ways, which creates diverse problems and policy implications. In the field of STEM, Huang et al. (2020) report notable gender disparities in academic publishing and career sustainability, which they attribute to inequalities in dropout rates and career durations between the sexes. They profess that structural obstacles prevent more women from pursuing long-term careers in academia, even in spite of comparable annual output rates. Casad et al. (2020) support this viewpoint by pointing up how women in STEM disciplines are severely disadvantaged by ingrained gender stereotypes and a lack of social capital, which has an impact on their participation and career advancement. The need for customized interventions that address the particular deterrents faced by women in various sectors is accentuated by these sector-specific discrepancies.
Cultural and Institutional Barriers
Institutional frameworks and cultural norms are crucial in maintaining gender inequity. In her critical analysis of the glacial speed of progress in eliminating gender disparity in higher education, O’Connor (2020) attributes this inertia to deeply ingrained organizational cultures that are resistant to change. The prevalent gender stereotypes that affect institutional policies and procedures and effectively marginalize women further exacerbate this resistance. Furthermore, Dahal et al. (2022) investigate how gender-based power imbalances in Nepal not only support a culture of violence against women but also institutionalize gender inequality by endorsing these practices. Both findings draw attention to the labyrinthine interactions that maintain gender gaps between conventional procedures and societal expectations.
Impact of Parenthood
Gender disparities in a range of economic outcomes are strongly influenced by parenthood, with women’s incomes and career paths being notably impacted. Using extensive analysis based on Danish administrative data, Kleven et al. (2019) show that women suffer a momentous long-term wage penalty following childbirth, but males are not affected comparably. This child penalty hinders women’s career advancement and adds to the ongoing salary disparity. The study indicates that policies promoting gender equality in parenting obligations could attenuate some of the financial effects of childbirth on women. It also reveals that societal norms around motherhood and employment are prominent factors driving these differences. The reviewed research focuses attention on how gender disparity affects economic performance and sector-specific dynamics in a variety of ways. Even though gender parity is highly supported by economic reasoning as a means of enhancing growth, institutional and cultural hurdles provide substantial obstacles to reaching this equality. Moreover, the unique influence of parenthood on gender inequality emphasizes the necessity of changing societal norms and policies to promote a fair distribution of child-rearing duties. Reforming the overt as well as covert systems that support gender inequality is necessary to address these problems.
Research Gap
The Analysis Endeavour
This study attempts to fill in leading gaps in the literature about the effects of gender disparity on the economy, despite a wealth of studies in this area. One major shortcoming is the absence of a panoptic analysis that concurrently covers multiple industries and geographical areas. The majority of previous research has tended to concentrate on certain topics within constrained geographical contexts, such as labor markets, education, or political representation (Dahal et al., 2022). This method may make it difficult to see how different sectors are related to one another and how differences in one can worsen problems in another. Furthermore, research that examines the effects of gender inequality typically focuses on a single nation or a small number of comparable nations. This restriction makes it more difficult to comprehend how gender inequality differs and manifests itself throughout the world in various cultural and economic contexts.
Closing the inequalities will benefit students academically, but it will also have a salient impact on policy formation and the reduction of economic inefficiencies brought on by gender inequality. This research may offer a more comprehensive and nicety view of gender inequality around the world by combining analyses from various industries and geographical areas. Additionally, it might provide information about how well certain gender policies work in various situations (Adeosun & Owolabi, 2021). Such a stance could assist decision-makers in creating interventions that are more individualized and successful.
Additionally, by identifying certain areas where gender-based interventions could result in meaningful economic benefits, this study hopes to contribute to the development of a more equitable framework for economic policy. For example, knowing how increasing women’s access to education affects labor market outcomes across sectors should spur more coordinated policy approaches that blend labor market interventions with educational changes (Psaki et al., 2022). To label the pervasive complexion of gender divergence and make sure that economic policies do not unintentionally maintain or worsen already-existing disadvantages, a holistic approach is requisite. The research presented here offers a thorough, cross-sectoral, and global investigation of gender inequities, which is poised to close a large gap in the current understanding of gender economics. It is predicted that the outcomes of this probing will ameliorate the theoretical foundation of gender economics and provide useful recommendations for policymakers seeking to lessen gender disparity and related economic inefficiencies. The research will serve the global objective of attaining gender equality and sustainable economic development in addition to advancing academic knowledge through this dual contribution.
Theoretical Background
Two Concepts
The contrivances through which gender inequality affects economic outcomes depend on a clutch of the theoretical frameworks that fortify the study of gender economics. Human capital theory and theories of labor market discrimination are two of these concepts that are especially pertinent. Axiomatically, unfair market discrimination is treating members of minority groups differently and at a disadvantage (Lippens et al., 2022). According to theories of labor market discrimination, women may encounter structural obstacles that restrict their access to employment possibilities and earnings potential in comparison to males. These theories accentuate how prejudices and preconceived notions about gender roles can result in unfair treatment when it comes to compensation, advancement, and employment. Contrarily, the human capital hypothesis asserts that making investments in people’s health, education, and training can raise their economic productivity (Hung & Ramsden, 2021). According to this idea, variations in how human capital accumulates—which are frequently impacted by cultural norms and educational opportunities—can help to explain some of the inequalities between the economic success of men and women.
It is impossible to overestimate the influence of cultural practices and social norms on gender dynamics in the workplace. Pierik (2022) investigates how men and women have historically been positioned differently due to profoundly ingrained patriarchal norms in societal institutions, which have influenced their relative economic opportunities and restraints. These systems frequently support gender inequality by giving men’s decision-making and resource-accessibility higher priority. What is more, the historical background of gender subjugation has consistently put women in economically disadvantageous positions (Akhter, 2020). These historical and cultural backgrounds offer a framework for assessing contemporary economic behaviors and practices, accenting the persistent influence of deeply embedded social norms on gender equality in economic settings.
On top of that, by analyzing how gender roles are viewed in contemporary educational contexts, notably in STEM professions, there is a contemporary perspective to these topics. According to Buenestado-Fernández et al.’s (2023) research, societal prejudices and preconceptions continue to exist in educational settings, where everyone should have equal access, and this has an impact on how people interact with their possible economic prospects. This is consistent with the human capital theory, which holds that cultural perceptions of gender roles have a direct bearing on young men and women’s educational and professional decisions, which in turn affects their potential economic contributions.
A thorough framework for examining the financial effects of gender discrepancies is provided by the merger of human capital theory with theories of labor market discrimination. Pierik (2022) and Akhter (2020) have stressed the magnitude of cultural and social norms. When taken together, these theories provide strong instruments for analyzing the convoluted relationships among gender, culture, and economic consequences. This theoretical framework guides the consideration of how gender inequalities are maintained and lessened in modern economic systems, setting the stage for this study’s investigation of gender economics.
Model
A panel data regression model is bound to be maneuvered for the econometric analysis of this study to appraise the consortium between marks of gender imbalance and economic outcomes in various nations. Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDP per capita) is a proxy for economic success and will be the dependent variable in the model.
Independent Variables and Expected Signs
- The main independent variable is the Gender Inequality Index (GII). Increased inequality is indicated by a higher GII score, which is predicted to reflect the financial cost of gender inequality by having a negative effect on GDP per capita (United Nations, 2022).
- The MMR (Maternal Mortality Ratio): A greater MMR, which represents reproductive health, is thought to have an obstructive collision on GDP per capita since it suggests worse health outcomes that might prevent women from entering the workforce (United Nations, 2022).
- Share of Seats Held by Women in Parliament: This variable assesses the political empowerment of women. Assuming that more female political representation results in more gender-inclusive policy making, an increase in this percentage is predicted to positively correlate with GDP per capita (United Nations, 2022).
- Female Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR): Greater female labor force participation is thought to have a beneficial effect on GDP per capita since it indicates greater utilization of the female workforce (United Nations, 2022).
The variables under control are Educational Attainment and GDP per capita. The former is determined by calculating the average number of years that females have completed their secondary education. Urbanization Rate is a higher GDP per capita that is typically linked to a higher urbanization rate, which serves as a stand-in for economic development level.
Data Set and Origin
The GII report from 2022, which offers thorough and internationally comparable data on gender-related disparities will be the source of the data for these variables (see Table 1 and Table 2). This dataset was chosen on account of its wide coverage and dependable methodology, both of which are essential for the econometric analysis’s validity.
Model Application
The econometric model is enumerated as follows: 𝐺𝐷𝑃𝑝𝑐𝑖=𝛼+𝛽1𝐺𝐼𝐼𝑖+𝛽2𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑖+𝛽3𝑆𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠𝑊𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑖+𝛽4𝐿𝐹𝑃𝑅𝐹𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑖+𝛽5𝐸𝑑𝑢𝐹𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑖+𝛽6𝑈𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛𝑖+𝜖𝑖
Where 𝐺𝐷𝑃𝑝𝑐𝑖 is the GDP per capita for country 𝑖, 𝐺𝐼𝐼𝑖 is the Gender Inequality Index, 𝑀𝑀𝑅𝑖 is the Maternal Mortality Ratio, 𝑆𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑠𝑊𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑖 is the percentage of parliamentary seats held by women, 𝐿𝐹𝑃𝑅𝐹𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑖 is the female labor force participation rate, 𝐸𝑑𝑢𝐹𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑖 is the average years of secondary education for females, 𝑈𝑟𝑏𝑎𝑛𝑖 is the urbanization rate, and 𝜖𝑖 is the error term.
To account for potential unobserved heterogeneity among nations that could affect GDP per capita, the model will be estimated using fixed effects. This approach accounts for impacts peculiar to a given country that are not accounted for by the observed variables, enabling a more accurate evaluation of the effect of gender inequality on economic results. Through the use of this model, the research seeks to offer concrete data on the effects of gender inequality on the economy, directing decision-makers toward more potent measures to lessen these gaps and promote general economic growth.
Results
This study’s econometric research provides indispensable new information about the effects of gender disparity on the economy. The GII and GDP per capita exhibited a negative connection, supporting the hypothesis that lower economic output is correlated with higher levels of gender inequality (see Table 3). In particular, a notable decline in GDP per capita was linked to a one-point increase in the GII, indicating that gender differences had a negative impact on economic performance. This result is consistent with the study done in 2021 by Altuzarra et al., which accented the detrimental effect that gender inequality had on economic growth.
GDP per capita was also adversely impacted by the MMR, supporting the theory that low reproductive health outcomes, a signpost of wider health and gender disparities, impede economic output. This finding italicizes the substance of healthcare and reproductive rights in economic planning and confirms the body of research that links poor maternal health to lower economic production (United Nations, 2022). The study’s econometric analysis provides strong evidence that there is a constructive interdependence between GDPs per capita and the proportion of women holding parliamentary seats. This relationship implies that more involvement of women in politics leads to more inclusive and thorough policymaking, which in turn argues that increased female representation in politics can greatly boost economic development. Grzelec (2022) asserts that the acceptance of more comprehensive socio-economic reforms—which are essential for sustained development—often follows the political empowerment of women. This may be the case due to the fact that female legislators are more inclined to support laws that deal with social concerns that have a greater impact on the populace, such as gender equity, healthcare, and education—all of which are crucial for strong economic growth.
Furthermore, the data demonstrated a positive correlation between GDPs per capita and the female LFPR, providing strong evidence that increased female economic participation positively supports economic growth. This principal discovery stresses the consequential economic gains that come from integrating women into the workforce more fully. It questions the laws and cultural conventions that currently limit women’s work options, arguing that doing so harms both women’s financial independence and the health of the American economy as a whole. This finding is consistent with a larger body of research that demonstrates economies that maximize the potential of their female population typically see faster rates of economic growth and better economic results (Kleven et al., 2019). Both results spotlight how relevant it is to implement economic methods that support gender equality in the workplace and politics. Removing obstacles that prevent women from participating in these fields can help nations fully use their human resource base, resulting in economies that are more resilient and dynamic.
Comparative Analysis with Existing Literature
This paper makes weighty contributions to the subject of gender economics by providing a thorough quantitative analysis of the ways in which different aspects of gender inequality affect economic performance. This research breaks out the specific channels—health, political empowerment, and labor market participation. Through them, gender disparity affects economic results, in contrast to more general analyses that frequently approach gender inequality as a monolithic issue. This method offers a deeper, more comprehensive knowledge of the complex nature of these differences by not only confirming but also expanding upon the results of earlier research.
While spotlighting the general detrimental effects of gender inequality on economic growth, Altuzarra’s study did not provide a thorough analysis of the many mechanisms at play. This study, on the other hand, goes further and provides a more detailed analysis that punctuates the unique economic effects of each aspect of gender inequality. For example, although Altuzarra et al. (2021) address gender inequality generally, this study offers empirical data on the correlations between particular factors—like maternal health and political representation—and economic performance. This is foremost due to the fact that it makes it possible for stakeholders and policymakers to more precisely focus interventions based on a clear knowledge of the areas of gender inequality that have the greatest negative impact on economic growth.
Implications for Policy and Institutional Practices
The study’s conclusions have a remarkable impact on institutional procedures and policy. The GII and MMR’s detrimental effects on GDP per capita demonstrate how urgently and economically it is to address both larger inequities and gender-based health disparities. Healthcare reforms that focus on reproductive rights and maternal health should be given top priority by policymakers as economic growth strategies rather than merely social welfare initiatives. Policies promoting gender parity in political representation may have good economic impacts, as evidenced by the favorable impact of women’s representation in parliament on economic output. Institutions ought to think about enacting quotas or other policies to boost the representation of women in politics since this could result in more fair and efficient decisions.
Likewise, the financial advantages linked to increased rates of female labor force participation indicate that eliminating obstacles to women’s work is essential for economic expansion. The elimination of workplace discrimination, training, and education should be the main objectives of policies meant to increase the involvement of women in the labor field. This study weighs the substantial financial consequences linked to gender inequality and the various ways that differences in labor participation, political empowerment, and health affect economic performance. The report backs up calls for broad gender-focused reforms in politics, jobs, and health by offering hard data on these linkages. In the end, tackling gender disparity is essential for sustainable development economically as well as morally and socially.
Conclusion
Using extensive data to investigate the correlations between gender disparity indices and GDP per capita, this study has methodically examined the effects of gender inequality on economic performance. The main conclusions show that increased gender inequality has a detrimental effect on economic output as indicated by the GII and the MMR. Contrariwise, a higher GDP per capita is positively correlated with more female engagement in politics and the labor force, indicating that empowering women in these domains fosters economic growth.
Understanding the complex nature of gender gaps and their effects on the economy will be greatly impacted by these findings. They foreground the advantages of promoting gender parity and the financial costs of preserving gender disparities. In particular, the findings support integrated policy approaches that take gender into account when developing larger economic and social policies, in addition to explicitly addressing gender inequities. Economic growth that is more inclusive and sustainable may result from this strategy.
Although the results are strong, there are certain restrictions on this research. Though the data used is substantial, there are gaps in it, especially when it comes to areas like educational attainment and adolescent birth rates. These gaps could offer deeper insights into the ways that gender differences in education and reproductive health affect economic outcomes. Besides, to procure a sounder cognizance of the causal mechanisms underlying the associations identified, qualitative analyses could be added to the study’s predominantly quantitative measures.
More thorough and detailed data should be incorporated into future studies, with the possibility of examining the long-term consequences of gender equality legislation. To provide a more comprehensive view of how societal changes affect economic outcomes, future research might look at the influence of cultural elements, which are decisive in defining gender norms and behaviors. Analyzing the consequences of gender disparity in microeconomic contexts, such as entrepreneurship and small business development, would be another exciting field for research seeing that it would allow researchers to see the effects at many levels of economic activity.
A firm call to action is necessary in view of these findings for legislators, educators, and economic institutions to reconsider and update their strategies for addressing gender inequality. As part of larger economic development measures, policymakers should give gender-sensitive health policies, comprehensive educational opportunities for women, and equitable representation in political arenas a top priority. Gender biases have to be eradicated, and girls’ access to high-quality education has to be improved, as this is the first step toward their economic empowerment. Businesses and financial institutions, among other economic institutions, ought to adopt fair hiring procedures and provide assistance for initiatives that encourage women’s involvement in the workforce. In the end, this research presents a strong case for the necessity of addressing gender inequality on an economic and social level. Through the incorporation of gender equality into fundamental economic and policy frameworks, countries can progress towards a fairer and more sustainable future while simultaneously improving their economic performance.
References
Adeosun, O. T., & Owolabi, K. E. (2021). Gender inequality: Determinants and outcomes in Nigeria. Journal of Business and Socio-economic Development, 1(2), 165–181.
Akhter, T. (2020). Gender inequality and literature: A contemporary issue. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 510, 1–4.
Altuzarra, A., Gálvez-Gálvez, C., & González-Flores, A. (2021). Is gender inequality a barrier to economic growth? A panel data analysis of developing countries. Sustainability, 13(1), 367.
Buenestado-Fernández, M., Ibarra-Vazquez, G., Patiño, A., & Ramírez-Montoya, M. S. (2023). Stories about gender inequalities and influence factors: A science club case study. International Journal of Science Education, 46(5), 403–420.
Casad, B. J., Franks, J. E., Garasky, C. E., Kittleman, M. M., Roesler, A. C., Hall, D. Y., & Petzel, Z. W. (2020). Gender inequality in academia: Problems and solutions for women faculty in STEM. Journal of Neuroscience Research, 99(1), 13–23.
Caven, V., Astor, E. N., & Urbanavičienė, V. (2021). Gender inequality in an “equal” environment. Gender, Work and Organization, 29(5), 1658–1675.
Dahal, P., Joshi, S. K., & Swahnberg, K. (2022). A qualitative study on gender inequality and gender-based violence in Nepal. BMC Public Health, 22(1).
Grzelec, A. (2022). Doing gender equality and undoing gender inequality – A practice theory perspective. Gender, Work and Organization, 1–19.
Huang, J., Gates, A. J., Sinatra, R., & Barabási, A. L. (2020). Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(9), 4609–4616.
Hung, J., & Ramsden, M. (2021). The application of human capital theory and educational signalling theory to explain parental influences on the Chinese population’s social mobility opportunities. Social Sciences, 10(10), 362.
Kleven, H., Landais, C., & Søgaard, J. E. (2019). Children and gender inequality: Evidence from Denmark. American Economic Journal. Applied Economics, 11(4), 181–209.
Lippens, L., Baert, S., Ghekiere, A., Verhaeghe, P., & Derous, E. (2022). Is labour market discrimination against ethnic minorities better explained by taste or statistics? A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 48(17), 4243–4276.
O’Connor, P. (2020). Why is it so difficult to reduce gender inequality in male-dominated higher educational organizations? A feminist institutional perspective. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews/ISR. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 45(2), 207–228.
Pierik, B. (2022). Patriarchal power as a conceptual tool for gender history. Rethinking History, 26(1), 71–92.
Psaki, S., Haberland, N., Mensch, B., Woyczynski, L., & Chuang, E. (2022). Policies and interventions to remove gender‐related barriers to girls’ school participation and learning in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review of the evidence. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 18(1).
Silva, M. S., & Klasen, S. (2021). Gender inequality as a barrier to economic growth: A review of the theoretical literature. Review of Economics of the Household, 19(3), 581–614.
United Nations. (2022). Gender inequality index. Human Development Reports.