Introduction

1. Measuring Gender InequalityandInequality in Social DevelopmentStephan KlasenUniversität GöttingenIndices ofSocial Development ConferenceDecember 15, 2011 1

2. Introduction • Increasinginterest in analyzinginequality (movingbeyondincomeinequality); • Experimental andempiricalevidence on theimportanceofinequality (plus ethicalconcern); • InequalityAdjusted Human Development Index; • Proliferation of Indices ofgenderinequality (GDI, GEM, GGI, GII, GEI, SIGI) withgreatdifferences in results; • World Bank WDR on Gender: New evidence on genderbias in mortality; • Unfortunately, manyofthesemeasuresbesetwithimportantconceptualandempiricalshortcomings; • Discussproblemsandproposesomesolutionswhereappropriateandpossible;

3. Outline • Measuringinequality in human development; • Measuringgenderinequality: • Gender inequality in mortality (WDR 2012); • GDI and GEM andwaysto fix them; • UNDP‘s New Gender Inequality Index; • SocialInstitutionsand Gender Index;

4. MeasuringInequality in Human Development • Key weaknessof HDI: ignoresinequalitywithindimensions; • Innovation of HDR 2010: Inequality-Adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI) • Key idea: ‚Penalize‘ countries forinequality in eachdimensionof human development (education, lifeexpectancy, andincomes); • Interesting, innovative anduseful; • Twocentralproblems: • Eachinequalityisconsideredseparately; jointdistributionofinequalities not considered (different datasources); • Inequality in healthreferstoinequalities in actuallifelengthsassociatedwith an averagelifeexpectancy, ratherthansocioeconomicinequality in lifeexpectancy; • Different approach (Harttgenand Klasen, 2011): • Measure human developmentatthehousehold-level; • Thenconsiderinequality in resulting HDI; • Addressesbothissues (but other open questions); 4

5. Source: Harttgenand Klasen (2011)

6. Source: Harttgenand Klasen (2011)

7. Gender InequalityMeasures • Proliferation ofmeasures; • GDI, GEM first, withmanytofollow; • General indexproblems: • Selectionof relevant dimensions; • Focus on well-being, agency, underlyingcauses; • Aggregation issues: • Arithmeticvsgeometricmean; Statistical aggregation via PCA; • Compensationbetweendimensions; • Specific Problems: • Internationally relevant comparabledimensionschallenging; • Whatisthe norm of ‚equality‘? Biologyandpreferences? • Aggregation: Problem ofopposinggaps. • Gender-sensitive versus gendergapmeasures.

8. WDR 2012: Gender Bias in Mortality • WDR wantstocalculateflowmeasureofgenderbias in mortality: annual toll due toexcessfemalemortality; • Comparisonactual male/femalemortality rate ratiowith ‚standard‘ ofrich countries today (Anderson, Ray, 2010); • Result: 4 millionmissingfemales per year, asmanyamongadultsasamongchildren, asserious in Africaas in South Asiaand China; • Twokeyproblems: • AllegedexcessfemalemortalityforAfricalargelybyconstruction (dataimputedbased on European historicalexperience); • Standard fromrich countries inappropriate; • Ifonecompareswith f/m mortality rate ratioofsimilarlifeexpectancies, EFM muchlower, mostlyAsia;

9. ExcessFemaleMortalityusing Different Standards Source: Anderson and Ray (2010) and Klasen and Vollmer (2011)

10. UNDP‘s GDI • Gender-sensitive measure (HDI adjusteddownwardsbywelfarepenaltyofgenderinequality); • Manyproblems • Oftenmisinterpreted; • Problem ofcompensationbetweendimensions; • Problem withearnedincomecomponent: • Whatisthe norm? • Gender inequality in earnings not equalinequality in consumption • Seriousdataproblems (uniform assumptions) • Possiblecorrections (Klasen and Schüler, 2011): • Male andFemale HDI • Turn GDI into Gender Gap Measure

14. Gender EmpowermentMeasure • Measuresinequality in economicandpoliticalparticipationand power; • Some Problems: • Data availability; • Focus on elites? • Compensationissue? • Income component: gender-inequalityadjustedlevelsofincomes; levels, ratherthangapsdriveresults! • Can partlybecorrected (usingincomesharesratherthanrates).

17. UNDP‘s Gender Inequality Index • Measureswelfarepenalty due togenderinequality (kindofgendergapindex) • 5 components: laborforceparticipation, secondaryeducation, teenagepregnancymaternalmortality, parliamentaryseats; • Fullofproblems: • Intransparent, highlycomplicated, hardtointerpret; • Mixes well-beingandempowerment; • Mixesachievementswithgaps; • No link to HDI; • Hardto fix.

18. Other Measures • World Economic Forum ‚Gender Gap Index‘: • Clear gendergapmeasure • Mixes well-beingandempowerment; • Toomanycomponentsand not inter-temporallycomparable; • Onlyuseofgaps • Social Watch Gender Equity Index: • Fartoomanycomponentstointerpret; • Mixes well-beingandempowerment; • Uncleardatabase; • Compensationissue;

19. OECD‘sSocialInstitutionsand Gender Index • Based on OECD Gender andInstitutions Database (Branisa, Klasen, Ziegler, 2009) • Aimstomeasureinstitutionalcausesofgenderinequality (not outcomes but ‚inputs‘); (useasinstrument) • 14 indicators in 5 dimensions: familycode, physicalintegrity, civilliberties, sonpreference, ownershiprights; • Based on subjectivescoring (oflawsandprevalence); • PCA toaggregatewithindimensions, partial compensationbetweendimensions; • Can explainimportantdevelopmentoutcomes (includingfertility, childmortality, education, corruption); • Problems: • Onlycross-sectionandunclearhowtothinkaboutdynamics; • Onlydeveloping countries; • Mixesprevalence, laws, etc;

22. Conclusions • Increasingrecognitiontomeasureandinterpretinequality, includinggenderinequality; • Composite indicesofgenderinequalityrequireparticularcare; • Manyofcurrentmeasureshaveseriousproblems, someofwhichcanbefixed; • Examining individual dimensionsratherthancompositemeasuresmightbemoreuseful; • Interestingnewapproaches (including SIGI and ISD) tobroadenscopeofmeasuringinequalitywhichhelptobetter understand causesof persistent inequalities in outcomes;