Upload
york
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Globalization and Gender Equality
Karolina Króliczek
Central European University
Draft work in progress – please do not cite without the author’s permission
Comments are warmly welcomed!
Abstract
This paper conducts the research into intrigue relationship between gender equality and
globalization. The objective of this research paper is to determine the relationship between
globalization types and their ability for supporting gender equality. Firstly the paper uses the
KOF Globalization Index (University of Zurich) and the Global Gender Gap Index (OECD) to
establish significance of relationship between those two variables. Furthermore, the paper
examines the relationship between three dimensions (subindexes) of KOF Index 2009:
economic globalization, social globalization and political globalization and gender equality
level under particular globalization type what is the main research question examined here.
The paper uses also the newly established SIGI Index 2012 (OECD) to estimate the
significant or non-significant relation between sociocultural globalization (KOF Index) and
the outcome achieved under social globalization type on gendered social contracts (SIGI
Index).
The aim of this paper is to study and evaluate which type of globalization type (as input
variable) has the highest effect on gender equality creation within indicators which are suited
to the input variable and measured as globalization type x outcome. This paper attempts to
show as the Author forecasted the high positive correlation existance within the KOF
economic globalization subindex and Global Gender Gap subindex of economic opportunities
than within the KOF political globalization subindex and GGG subindex of political
empowerment (outcome dimension). The sociocultural globalization type has been discovered
as the most influential towards achieving gender equality and changing “social contracts”
within society on more gender equal.
2
Globalization and Gender Equality
Numerous studies have attempted to explain to what extent globalization influences on
gender equality and the particular consequences of globalization which stand behind decrease
or increase of gender gaps (ex. Tseloni, 2009; Sweening, 2004). Pearson (2010) defines
globalization as “the process in which economic, financial, technical and cultural transactions
between different countries and communities throughout the world are increasingly
interconnected and embody common elements of experience, practice and understanding.”
(2010:10).
The relationship between globalization and gender “contracts” has been widely
investigated from the point of development studies which mostly focus on investigation of
gender inequality on the labor market, gender wage inequality existance or estimate
unemployment rates associated with growth (Blau, 2000; Blank, 1999). As Freeman (2001)
truly recognized gender policy is often linked to development studies not to globalization
what makes that topic intriguing to solve. Jeffrey Williamson, Peter Lindert and many others
researchers which deal with globalization issue do not consider the topic of gender inside their
prominent research influence (Camps. 2009). The globalization is often mandated as gender
neutral what furthermore establish the masculine standpoint for jointly investigation of gender
and globalization (Acker, 2004). There is no doubt that the link between globalization and
gender has to be established.
Acker (2004) defines gender as “inequalities, divisions and differences socially
constructed around assumed distinction between female and male (2004:3) Gender is an
organizing principle in social life, allocation of duties, rights, rewards and power, including
the means of violence. Women are usually disadvantaged here.” (2004:3).
It is recognized that gender plays an important role in division of labour, education
outcomes and wage incomes (Cagay, 2004). All types of globalization examined here have to
be recognized as being gender biased. Economic globalization might create gender-based
wage gaps, sociocultural globalization might establish unfavorable for “social codes” and
political globalization might in fact have little influence on the women empowerment
if the international assignments (for ex. against violence) tend to be not restricted on the
national level.
3
The globalization is often being portrayed under two schools approaches linked
to gender. One positive school states the globalization is in favour of the gender equality due
to the trade openness, opening of export-oriented industries and “feminization of labor” what
result in better life prospects for women (Tseloni, 2009). In contrast, de-industrialization and
wage gap differences between skilled and unskilled hit women disproportionately especially
in established industrial economies (Tseloni, 2009:3). Furthermore globalization is seen as
reinforcing the subordination of women to low paid, low status and part- time jobs
(Moghadam, 1999). The outcomes of the globalization differ in case of access, assets and
control over resources by women (Cagatay, 2004).
It is significantly important to assess the globalization type implications on gender gap
coverage within economic opportunities, political empowerment and sociocultural codes of
behaviours (“society contracts”). Sapkota’s research (2011) outlined significance of all three
faces of globalization on human development and human poverty outcomes, but
contemporary academic researchers keep silence about globalization types and their
connections with gender equality.
To recap, the following research questions are investigated in that paper:
The preliminary question: If there is any significant link between globalization (KOF
Index 2009) and Gender Gap Coverage (Global Gender Gap 2012).
Hypothesis 1. There is a significant link between globalization and gender equality creating.
The main research question: How different types of globalization deliver the
gender equality.
Hypothesis 2. The economic globalization is more efficient for creating equal economic
opportunities for women than political globalization.
Hypothesis 3. The cultural globalization has the highest correlation within the globalization
types for creating gender equality.
Hypothesis 4. Political globalization has the lowest impact on the political empowerment (%
of female in the Lower Chamber).
Finally, paper answers which input type of the globalization (economic globalization,
sociocultural globalization and political globalization) is estimated to be the most successful
in creating gender equality outcomes.
4
Research Methodology
The research paper widely uses the highly-ranked scientific indexes to establish the
relationship between globalization and gender equality as KOF Index of Globalization
(University of Zurich), Global Gender Gap Index 2012 (World Economic Forum, WEF) and
SIGI Index (OECD, Social Institutions and Gender Index 2012). The consistency of particular
index indicators is presented in the Table 1 below. Additionally, SPSS (Statistical Package for
the Social Sciences) has been used to estimate the statistical correlations between particular
indexes. The GGG Index estimates from 0-1 measurement scale (inequality - equality), when
the KOF Index estimates the scale of observation from 0 to 100.
The SIGI Index takes the measure of “social contract” from 0-1 (with 0 as social contract
gender-positive, to 1 - gender-negative social contracts). The study draws on collection of the
countries data cases across n-88 up to n-124 countries. SIGI Index is particularly limited to n-
88 due to the fact of being focused mostly on developing countries.
Table 1. Scientific Indexes used in the research and their indices and variables weights.
SCIENTIFIC INDEXES USED Indices and Variables Weights
A. Economic Globalization:
KOF Index (University of Zurich)
i) Actual Flows: Trade (percent of GDP), Foreign Direct Investment, stocks (percent of GDP) Portfolio Investment (percent of GDP), Income Payments to Foreign Nationals (percent of GDP)
(ii) Restrictions:
Hidden Import Barriers, Mean Tariff Rate, Taxes on International Trade (percent of current revenue) Capital Account Restrictions
B. Social Globalization : i) Data on Personal Contact, Telephone Traffic, Transfers (percent of GDP), International Tourism, Foreign Population (percent of total population), International letters (per capita)
ii) Data on Information Flows: Internet Users (per 1000 people). Television (per 1000 people) , Trade in Newspapers (% of GDP)
iii) Data on Cultural Proximity, Number of McDonald's Restaurants (per capita), Number of Ikea (per capita), Trade in books (percent of GDP)
C. Political Globalization:, Embassies in Country, Membership in International Organizations, Participation in U.N. Security Council Missions, International Treaties.
Global Gender Gap Index (World
Economic Forum)
The Global Gender Gap Index examines the gap between men and women in four fundamental categories (subindexes): economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival and political empowerment.
Economic Participation and Opportunity: Ratio: Female labour force participation over male value, Wage Equality between women and men for similar work (converted to female-over-male ratio), Ratio: Estimated female earned income over male value, Ratio: Female legislators, senior officials and managers over male value, Female professional and technical workers over male value.
Political Empowerment: Ratio: females with seats in parliament over male value, Ratio: females at ministerial level over male value, Ratio: number of years of a female head of state or government (last 50 years) over male
5
SIGI Index (OECD)
Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI) measures important inputs to such outcome inequalities in non OECD-countries. Social institutions are conceived as long-lasting codes of conduct, norms, traditions, and informal and formal laws that impact on gender equality (OECD).
Different types of globalization and different gendered outcomes?
Scatterplot 1. shows that there is no significant correlation between the level of globalization
and the inequality or equality existance within n-133 of countries investigated. Almost all
countries are equally widespreaded within four parts of the scatterplot (divided through x-
axis and y-axis lines).
Most of developing countries have rising globalization level due to high outflows and
no trade restrictions when the gender equality remains unchanged or even worse (ex. as the
result of recruiting women into ETZ (Export-Trade zone) with the lowest salary and
unhealthy work conditions). Some countries as for example South Africa or Uganda have low
level of economic globalization and achieve the high level of gender equality under
incorporating widespreaded social changes from Western societies but also due to the fact of
international organization campaigning which intensively promote gender equality by their
development programs: ex. Oxfam).
6
Hypothesis 1. There is a significant positive correlation link between globalization
(measured by KOF 2009 Index) and gender equality (measured by Global Gender Gap 2012
Index). FALSE
Scatterplot 1. The Correlation between KOF Index 2009 and GGG Index 2012.
Hence the common trend that foreign direct investment (FDI)1 and trade liberalization
lead to massive exports and beneficial investments for the country can be rejected if the
gender equality is on the horizon of FDI and trade openness observation.
Although there are also country cases which were classified in the IV squared part and
achieve high level of globalization (80.000 – 90.000) and high level of gender equality within
the country (0.7-0.9 score) as Scandinavian well-known triangle: Norway, Sweden and
1 Foreign Direct Investment: direct investment by a company in another country, either by buying a company in
the target country or by expanding operations of an existing business in that country.
7
Finland The hypothesis about positive or negative impact of globalization in overall on
covering the gender gaps and creating gender gaps inequality on the beginning has been
rejected. The one question which will be considered is the recognition of existing
correlations within KOF Index of Globalization subindexes (globalization types:
economic, sociocultural, political) as input measure and Global Gender Gap Subindexes
(economic opportunity, health, education, political empowerment) as the outcome under
particular globalization type (economic, political, sociocultural). Therefore, the results
achieved under overall KOF Index and GGG Index have to be interpreted with caution
because the scatterplot was not able to divide the role and the intensity of the particular
globalization types on gender equal outcomes, what will draws the researcher attention in the
next pages of the paper.
Types of Globalization and their relationship towards gender equality
The economic globalization is defined by actual country flows and economic
restrictions. Actual flows are recognized as sum of exports and imports of goods and services
(easily: trade), foreign direct investment (sum of inward and outward FDI stock). Income
payments to foreign nationals, mean tariff rate, international trade taxation and the level of
capital account restrictions (KOF Index). Mohan (2009) identifies the economic globalization
type as increase in the country’s economic interdependence on the hands of the world market
due to rapid increase of cross-border movements of services, goods, technologies and capitals.
The economic globalization still suffers from the question mark of gender equality creating.
From one side often helps the women to start micro-credits activities and find a job, but from
the other side - in developing countries intensive globalization often forces unskilled women
to agricultural sectors (the trend opposite to developed countries where skilled women tend to
be in non-agricultural sectors at all as public services.).
The sociocultural globalization is the global spread of ideas and trends which due to
country’s cultural identification transmits the ideas, beliefs and values and incorporates them
into the society. For example the consumism lifestyle as a side of the cultural globalization is
measured by the number of McDonald’s Restaurants (per capita) or Scandinavian Ikea shops
within the country (KOF Index). The level of social globalization is also measured through
8
telephone traffic, transfers, international tourism, internet users or trade in newspapers.
Theoretically, the high access to cultural globalization should be positively correlated with the
creation of gender-positive social contracts.
In contrast, often the poverty, illiteracy and lack of social openness is linked to low
level of cultural globalization (UNESCO). Deeper analyse will be outlined under the
sociocultural globalization paper chapter, where the link between sociocultural globalization
will be investigated with SIGI Index which is responsible for estimating the power of gender-
negative social contracts in society (as for ex. violence against women, early marriage and
reproductive integrity).
The political globalization is recognized as increase of the international agreements
and contracts within the countries, establishment of the international organizations
(governmental, NGO’s) and often due to the fact of the easy internet access the manifestation
of the citizens feelings through happenings, strikes and manifestations. The political
globalization is often used to force the collective activists actions. From the gender
perspective, the high level of political globalization should result in the high women
empowerment in the Lower Chamber of Parliament (measured by GGG subindex: Political
Empowerment). Furthermore, most of international organizations as United Nations or OECD
force gender tools and international norms that have to be respected by the signing countries.
There is a significant questions analysed here: Does embassies, international organisations,
United Nations agencies and country membership in international treaties is positively
correlated within the increase of women political empowerment?
Economic Globalization and Gender Equality
Recent evidence suggests that cross-national exchange and production of goods lead to
improvements in women equality (Kittilson, 2004). The author argues that economic
globalization changed the women work and life conditions on slightly better (Kittilson, 2004).
Furthermore, women are able to work in non-household employment, while the openness
towards FDI (foreign direct investment) benefited in women infusion into the job markets
(Standing, 1989). The FDI in low income countries often makes the jobs available for women
and paid better than domestic producers (Kittilson, 2004).
9
Drastic but positive changes which come from the intense economic globalization is the
change of gender-roles in private households. The globalized woman has more independence
and personal autonomy, especially in homes which become more equal and more dependent
on women incomes. The women from low income countries additionally learn how to gain
control around house budgeting process and even request the husband help in domestic duties
(Sassen, 1996). According to Kujawa (2011) greater access to land and micro-credits
restructure changed the gendered relation on more positive within South Asian households.
Economic globalization is responsible for increase of the female employment in developing
countries within manufacturing sector from 6% in 1987 to 7% in 2007, while the employment
in public services has grown from 17% to 24% (World Bank Development Report, 2012).
Although World Bank projects promoting gender equality (WB) has mixed impact on women
in the developing countries. WB still supports projects which give the loans to women under
the assumption that the grant is small-scaled what makes the gender negative division
between women projects (based on domestic activities) and men projects as for example
agricultural assistance or access to credit (Bystydzinski, 2002).
Under equal economic globalization not only female are the main beneficiates of equal
opportunities on the market, but also country’s economy benefits at all. The intensive
economic globalization creates global competitiveness is not able to work properly if there is
high level of gender inequality within the particular country SIGI (OECD. 2012:30).
Additionally countries which are able to implement equal opportunities for female and men at
overall achieve higher GDP per capita results than those which suffer from sex inequality.
(OECD. 2012:30).
However, there is an inconsistency with claims that economic globalization is definitely
good for women. Intensive international trade often destroys local economies and the natural
environment is to some extent degraded. The globalization is often presented as “a process out
there that has devastating impact on the locally lived realities of women lives and women are
represented as victims of evil global processes or as heroines fighting against global
processes.” (Davids, 2009:905). Unskilled female labor is mostly employed in the ETZ
(export trade zone) which pay low wages and working conditions are not restricted, unhealthy
and overwork is on the daily scheme. The dark side shows that despite the removal of trade
barriers and investment restrictions together with greater women access to jobs, economic
globalization forced women to work in exploitive conditions and increased discrimination
trends (Murray, 2013:5).
10
Furthermore in some countries the gender division of labour is extremely not equal on
the market. In Pakistan which has low level of globalization as well as economic opportunities
there is a widespread gender gap in the labour forces participation which is estimated on
49.3% of males and only 14% of females which are positioned in informal sector and low
paid menial jobs (Murray, 2013). Some researchers (ex. Greenaway, 1999; Edison, 2002)
established the positive relationship between globalization on poverty reduction, however the
globalization relationship with negative impact on income inequality rising has been
discovered also. The striking observation has been done by Sweeney (2004) who investigated
opposite globalization direction effect that high trade level and capital flows influence
women’s political rights and not significantly the women’s economic rights.
Economic globalization shapes equal opportunities for mostly of skilled women which
work in public sector, when “export zone enclaves” tend to hire poor and uneducated women
for lower wages and creates job insecurity (Bystydzinski, 2002). That uncertain relationship
between job insecurity in developing countries under intensive economic globalization remind
the uncertainty of past capitalism transformation in the CEE (Central and Eastern Europe)
what under capitalism incorporating on the market resulted in the high women
unemployment. That scenario makes developing countries even worst, in fact most of those
countries have low social spending, what drastically makes female situation critical under the
financial crisis. External debts as well as economic crises hit the women firstly with the larger
costs than hit the men (Stromquist, 2005). The liberalization of trade under intensive
globalization significantly reduce the power of trade unions at all (Stromquist, 2005) what
further forces women to work in labor industries at lower wages that men would accept ant
the union would not permit (Bacchus, 2005).
The countries as Oman, Bahrain and Jordan have high level of economic globalization
(due to trade openness and foreign investments) do not achieve high gender equality and do
not provide equal opportunities for both sexes into economic market entrance. In contrast to
it, Singapore, Luxembourg, Argentina, Norway or Canada established the gender supportive
relation between actual flows and restrictions and the equal economic opportunities and
participation on the market for both sexes (Scatterplot 4). Interestingly, all Nordic countries
were able to fight the gender gaps on the market through displaying of gender equality
starting from the primary school what in the future make women the majority of the high-
skilled workforce and it has also reflection on the Scatterplot 2 below (GGG Index 2012:19).
11
The value of KOF Economic Globalization Subindex (input indicators measure2) and
GGG Economic Participation and Opportunities (outcome indicators measure3) suggest that
there is a weak positive Pearson’s correlation (2-tailed type) between the level of economic
globalization estimated on 0.3294 (n-124) with standard deviations estimated on 16.06 for
KOF Index and 0.12 for GGG Economic subindex.5
Scatterplot 4.
2 Economic Globalization: Actual Flows: Trade (% of GDP), Foreign Direct Investment, stocks (% of GDP)
Portfolio Investment (% of GDP), Income Payments to Foreign Nationals (% of GDP). Restrictions: Hidden
Import Barriers, Mean Tariff Rate, Taxes on International Trade (percent of current revenue) Capital Account
Restrictions 3 Economic Participation and Opportunity: Ratio: Female labour force participation over male value,
Wage Equality between women and men for similar work (converted to female-over-male ratio),
Ratio: Estimated female earned income over male value, Ratio: Female legislators, senior officials and managers
over male value, Female professional and technical workers over male value. 4 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
12
In contrast, the correlation between the KOF Political Globalization subindex and GGG
subindex of Economic participation and opportunities has been estimated as being non-
significant and negative valued on -0.39. Therefore, the economic globalization higher level
of equal economic opportunities for women than political globalization type has been
confirmed. (Hypothesis 2.)
Sociocultural globalization and gender equality
Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris argued that economic growth is only a part of the
story towards gender equality; the role of the substantial changes in the social norms, beliefs
and values is underlined in order to achieve greater equality (Inglehart&Norris, 2003).
The rapid growth through foreign direct investment in South Asia changes not only
economic opportunities, but also changes the culture (Murray, 2013). Singapore correlation
recognized on the KOF social globalization vs. SIGI Index has the highest social globalization
level from all n- 88 country cases observed (av. 91. 039) and has the lowest gap in the
“societal contracts” estimated on the average 0.46 (Scatterplot 5). Saudi Arabia, Jordan,
Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman represent countries with high social globalization index, however the
negative social contracts which result in gender inequality remain to survive in that particular
societies (Scatterplot 5.) The SIGI index examined through Saudi Arabia mentioned above
showed high social globalization level (av. 69.370) connected with high female discrimination
(av. 11.000) within the society around cultural codes as: lack of authority after divorce, no
law against rape and domestic violence and restricted access to public spaces for women
(SIGI, 2012). The female equal access to credit remains the one worth of underlining in that
case.
Further, discrimination of cultural codes within the family result in women inability to
get negotiate paid job with caring responsibilities. The cultural Arabian restrictions about
women access to the public space also tend to favour firstly the husband to choose the women
workplace what reduces women employment opportunities (OECD SIGI Raport 2012:27).
Interestingly, Nepal, Cambodia and Mongolia achieved the lowest level of gender
inequality within social norms confronted jointly with the lowest level of social globalization
in n-88 country cases investigated (Scatterplot 5.) Contemporary trends in Cambodia
6 SIGI Index has opposite trend direction measure and gives 0 for social contracts supportive for gender
equality and 1 for social contracts within society which are negative for gender equality.
13
according to SIGI index (developing countries samples) do not support early marriage,
incorporates laws system against domestic violence towards women and equal authority after
divorce.
Scatterplot 5.
Within n-88 case countries investigated the Pearson’s correlation between KOF
social globalization index and SIGI Index 2012 (Social Institutions and Gender Index)7 has
been estimated on 0,434 what in fact discover the high social globalization power to influence
on the changes in gendered society code on more equal. Standard deviation for KOF social
globalization index has been estimated on 16.26 (for SIGI st. deviation achieved 2.88).
Standard error of the mean for SIGI is defined on 0.307 level, while for KOF SG subindex
7 SIGI: Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI) measures important inputs to such outcome inequalities in
non OECD-countries. Social institutions are conceived as long-lasting codes of conduct, norms, traditions,
and informal and formal laws that impact on gender equality (OECD).
14
is estimated on 1.73. The Hypothesis 3. which link the cultural globalization with the highest
correlation within influence on estimating of gender equal cultural codes within society has
been confirmed (Scatterplot 5.).
In contrast, correlation between KOF Social Globalization level and GGG Index (n-137
cases) do not exist at all and is not visible what can suggest that the social globalization more
effect on outcomes of the cultural codes and social institutions, later probably if ever on the
covering of global gender gap (Scatterplot 6.).
Scatterplot 6.
15
Political Globalization and Gender Equality
Numerous studies have found that women from countries with high proportion of female
in the Lower Chamber are more able to benefit from the positive policy consequences for
women daily lives (ex. Bacchi, 1999, Woodward, 2011 and Dahlerup, 2006). There is nothing
surprising in the low correlation achieved due to the fact that international organizations deal
with establishing of international norms and do not have the power to influence country
national decision-making as for example supporting national female campaigning or financing
of partisan female candidates campaigns.
As the Scatterplot 7 suggests, the effect of political globalization on women
empowerment remains is surprisingly low for low-globalized countries as well as for
developed countries which already have established great international organizations
interconnectedness. Contrary, the significant correlation could not be expected due to the fact
that international organizations and embassies work have to work on the politic-neutral
ground and direct influence on the female candidates forcing would be destroyed for them,
even if highly influential.
Although as the research below shows there is a significant low correlation between the
KOF Political Globalization subindex8 and the Global Gender Gap Political Empowerment
subindex9 (Scatterplot7.) The overall correlation between KOF subindex Political
globalization 2009 (input indicator) and GGG subindex political empowerment (output
indicator) within n-133 countries occurred to be positive but weak, the correlation has been
estimated on 0.240 what makes the lowest globalization type correlation with gender equal
outcome examined in that particular paper (Scatterplot 7). Hypothesis 4 about low political
globalization impact on the female political empowerment (measured as % of female in the
Lower Chamber) has been positively confirmed. The results provide in depth the truth: the
international organizations in fact do not have the impact on the gender-friendly decision
making on the national level.
8 KOF Political Globalization input indicators: Embassies in Country, Membership in International
Organizations, Participation in U.N. Security Council Missions, International Treaties. 9 GGG Political Empowerment output indicators: Ratio: females with seats in parliament over male value,
Ratio: females at ministerial level over male value, Ratio: number of years of a female head of state or
government (last 50 years) over male
16
Scatterplot 7.
The Scatterplot 7. above shows that political globalization (as international organizations,
IO) suffer from inability to force gender equality into country domestic politics. However,
some studies (ex. O’Regan,2000). investigated that high women’s participation in the
parliament tend to result in stronger policies of employment and stronger wage protectionism.
Furthermore, also the significant positive relation on women empowerment has been
discovered between high female level of labor force participation what results in greater
female representation in parliament (Kittilson, 2004). Furthermore as the author (2004) have
found the larger female representation within labour forces often leads to the larger pool of
female candidates to run for parliamentary office.
17
The CEDAW international convention10
signing has been associated with 2% of increase
of the women workforces and the UN and WB country member status will affect female labor
forces 0.9 % higher within 35 years (on average), than the membership of country with
12 years (Kittilson, 2004). Furthermore, the increase in FDI (as % of GFCF11
) from 4 to 20%
leads to increase of 0.6% points in female parliamentary seats. The membership in
international organizations like UN and WB and ratification of CEDAW are associated with
improving of women conditions globally (Gray&Kittilson, 2004), but are not associated with
increase of female participation in the Lower Chamber (it has been confirmed in the
Scatterplot 7). Although political globalization definitely increased the growth and visibility
of international women movements, when the national gender equality discourse in the Lower
Chamber of gender equality remained untouched. However, the Scandinavian countries as
Finland, Norway and Sweden achieve significant trend of having both many if international
organizations and high percent of women influence in the parliament although it is rather
effect of culture promoting of equal gender policy under welfare state framework than
globalization influence.
Conclusion: The findings of globalization type towards more gender equality
Norris and Inglehart in “Rising Tides Gender Equality & Cultural Change around the
World” (2003) frankly recognized that firstly the cultural changes are needed for creation of
gender equal institutions and global gender equality on the market. Not without reasons, in
that research paper, the cultural globalization has been associated with the highest ability to
cover the gender gaps within the society and promote the socio-cultural contracts which are
positive towards gender equality incorporation. The changes forces under social globalization
occurred to positively affect both beliefs and values of social institutions and cultural codes
(SIGI Index). Changes in sociocultural globalization are able to strongly affect both people as
institutions, what makes that globalization type the most distinguished to establish positive
and equal opportunities for female within the often negative gendered society
10
The CEDAW International Convention has been adopted by UN General Assembly in 1978. The first
international bill signed by over 50 countries which describes the international rights of women. 11
GFCF - Gross Fixed Capital Formation: the total value of a producer's acquisitions, less disposals of fixed
assets during the accounting period plus certain additions to the value of non-produced assets (such as subsoil
assets or major improvements in the quantity, quality or productivity of land) realised by the productive activity
of institutional units (source:wikipedia:GFCF)
18
The sociocultural differences within the research definitely have to be recognized as
creating further influence on the outcomes of economic opportunities and political
opportunities within economic globalization and political globalization. That is probably the
main reasons, why the globalization has to be incorporated firstly by culture, later by
economic and political institutions.
The further research should be conducted to deny the sex differences and globalization
influence and rather focus on the social contracts examining within the society. The research
done here could be also preliminary extended on the examination of the globalization input
overall and in particular globalization type division on the two basic inputs as examination of
gender equality under globalization x type on gender equal education and on gender equal
health access opportunities. The social structures and cultural trends seem to be more
catchable by the institutional frameworks and probably the best practices to produce gender
equality will be associated with them in the future. The other types of globalization will be
more supportive for creating gender equality when the social contracts will force globalization
powers into respecting their cultural values and the pressure under dominant social contracts
will be pressure on them through the society. There is some further research prediction if the
increase in overall globalization cultural trend will shift up the economic and political
globalization as the result of the spillover effect on more gender equal.
19
References
Acker, J. (2004). Gender, Capitalism and Globalization. Critical Sociology 30(1), pp.17-41.
Akhter, R. (2009). Globalization and gender equality: A critical analysis of women's
empowerment in the global economy. Advances in Gender Research 13(1), pp. 141-173.
Bacchi, C. (1999). Women, Policy and Politics. The Construction of Policy Problems.
London: SAGE.
Bacchus, N. (2005). The Effects of Globalization on Women in Developing Countries. Pace:
Pace University.
Blau, F. & Kahn, M.(2000). Gender Differences in Pay. Journal of Economic Perspectives
14(4), pp. 75-99.
Busse, M. & Spielmann, C. (2008). Gender Inequality and Trade. Hamburg: Hamburg
Institute of International Economics.
Bystydzienski, J. (2002). Contradictory Effects of Globalization on Women: Problems,
Challenges and Opportunities. Iowa: Iowa State University.
Cagatay, N. (2004). Gender and Globalization: A Macroeconomic Perspective. Geneva: ILO.
Camps, E. (2009). Globalization and Culture as Factors that Shape the Gender Gap: A
Comparative Study of Urban Latin America and East Asia. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu
Fabra.
Chen, Z. (2013). Globalization and Gender Wage in China. World Development 44(1), pp.
256-266.
Davids, T. (2013). The Unhappy Marriage between Gender and Globalisation. Third World
Quarterly 30(5), pp. 906-920.
20
Edison, H. (2002). International Financial Integration and Economic Growth. Journal of
International Money and Finance 21(6), pp.749-776.
Greenway, D.(1999). Exports, Export Composition and Growth. Journal of International
Trade&Economic Development 8(1), pp. 41-51.
Kittilson, M. (2004). Women and Globalization: A Study of 180 Countries 1972-2000.
APSA: APSA Conference 2004.
KOF Globalization Index. Available at : http://globalization.kof.ethz.ch/ [Accessed 1 May
2012].
Kujawa, E. (2008). Empowering Women’s Leadership: A Case Study of Bangladesh
Microcredit Business. SAM Advanced Management Journal 73(4), pp.31-39.
Ghosh, B. (2011). Cultural Changes and Challenges in the Era of Globalization: The Case of
India. Journal of Developing Studies 27(1), pp. 153-173.
Global Gender Gap Index (2012). Available at: http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-
report-2012/ [Accessed 1 May 2012].
Horgan, G. (2001). How Does Globalisation Affect Women? International Socialism Journal
2001 (1), pp. 1-10.
ILO (2008). Gender Dimension of Globalization. Available at:
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/--
integration/documents/meetingdocument/wcms_100856.pdf [Accessed 1 May 2012].
Inglehart, R. & Norris,P. (2003). Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around
the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21
Lovell, P. (2000). Race, Gender and Regional Labor Market Inequalities in Brazil. Review of
Social Economy 58(3), pp. 277-293.
Mohan, J. (2009) International Business. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Moghadam, V. (1999). Gender and Globalization. Female Labour and Women’s
Mobilization. Journal of World System Research 5(2), pp. 367-388.
Murray, P. (2013). Gender, Globalisation and Institutional Change. Journal of South Asian
Studies 1(1), pp. 1-20.
Oostendorp, R. (2009). Globalization and the Gender Wage Gap. The World Bank Economic
Review 23(1), pp. 141-161.
O’Regan, V. (2000). Gender Matters: Female Policy Makers Influence in Industrialized
Nations. CT: Preager.
Pearson, R. (2010). Moving the Goalposts: Gender and Globalisation in the Twenty-First
Century. Gender&Development 8(1), pp. 10-19.
Potrafke, N. (2012). Globalization and Gender Equality in the Course of Development.
European Journal of Political Economy 28(4), pp. 399-413.
Potrafke, N. (2011). Globalization and Gender Equality in Developing Countries. Konstanz:
University of Konstanz.
Sapkota, J. (2011). Globalization and Human Aspect of Development in Developing
Countries: Evidence From Panel Data. Journal of Globalization Studies 2(1), pp.78-96.
Schulz, P. (2003). Does Globalization Enhance Gender Equality. Yale: Yale University.
22
Scrase, R. (2003). Paradoxes of Globalization, Liberalization and Gender Equality: The
Worldviews of the Lower Middle Class in West Bengal, India. Gender and Society 17(4),
pp.544-566.
Seugino, S. (2006). The Great Equalizer? Globalization Effect on Gender Equality in Latin
America and the Carribean. Burlington: Vermont University.
Seugino, S. (1997). Gender Wage Inequality and Export-Led Growth in South Korea. Journal
of Development Studies 34(4), pp. 102-132.
Seugino, S. (2005). Gender Inequality in Globalizing World. New York: UNRISD.
Seugino, S. (2006). Gender Equity and Globalization: Macroeconomic Policy for Developing
Countries. Munich: University of Munich.
Seugino, S. (2000). Gender Inequality and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Analysis.
World Development 28(7), pp.1211-1230.
SIGI (2012). Social Institutions and gender Index: Understanding the Drivers of Gender
Inequality. Paris: OECD.
Standng, G. (1989). Global Feminization Through Flexible Labor. World Development 17(7),
pp.1077-1095.
Stromquist, N. (2005). The Impact of Globalization on Education and Gender: an Emergent
Cross-Bational Balance. Journal of Education 37(1), pp. 7-37.
Sweeney, S. (2004). Global Transformations, National Institutions and Women Rights: A
Cross National Comparative Analysis. Chicago: APSA conference meeting.
Tseloni, A. (2009). Globalization, Development and Gender Equality across the World:
A Multivariate Multilevel Approach. London: London Metropolitan University.
23
World Bank (2011). Globalization Impact on Gender Equality. Available at:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2012/Resources/7778105-
1299699968583/7786210-1315936222006/chapter-6.pdf [Accessed 1 May 2012].
World Bank Development Report. Gender Equity and Development (2012). Available at:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2012/Resources/77781051299699968583/77862
10-1315936222006/Complete-Report.pdf [Accessed 1 May 2012].
Code Glossary
Research Country Codes
Albania ALB
Algeria DZA
Angola ANG
Argentina ARG
Armenia ARM
Australia AUS
Austria AUT
Azerbaijan AZE
Bahamas, The BHS
Bahrain BHR
Bangladesh BGD
Barbados BRB
Belarus BLA
Belgium BEL
Belize BLZ
Benin BEN
Bhutan BHT
Bolivia BOL
Bosnia and Herzegovina BSH
Botswana BWA
Brazil BRA
Brunei Darussalam BRN
Bulgaria BGR
Burundi BDI
Cambodia KHM
Cameroon CMR
Canada CAN
Cape Verde CPV
Central African Republic ZAF
Chad TCD
Chile CHL
China CHN
Colombia COL
Congo, CON
Costa Rica CRI
24
Cote d'Ivoire CIV
Croatia HRV
Cuba CUB
Cyprus CYP
Czech Republic CZE
Denmark DNK
Dominican Republic DOM
Ecuador ECU
Egypt, Arab Rep. EGY
El Salvador SLV
Eritrea ERT
Estonia EST
Ethiopia ETH
Fiji FJI
Finland FIN
Macedonia MCD
France FRA
Gambia, The GMB
Georgia GEO
Germany DEU
Ghana GHA
Greece GRC
Guatemala GTM
Guinea GNA
Guyana GUY
Haiti HTI
Honduras HND
Hungary HUN
Iceland ISL
India IND
Indonesia IDN
Iran IRN
Iraq IRQ
Ireland IRL
Israel ISR
Italy ITA
Jamaica JAM
Japan JPN
Jordan JOR
Kazakhstan KAZ
Kenya KEN
Korea, Rep. KOR
Kuwait KWT
Kyrgyz Republic KGZ
Lao People's Democratic Republic LAO
Latvia LVA
Lebanon LBN
Lesotho LSO
Liberia LBR
Libya LBY
Lithuania LTU
Luxembourg LUX
Macedonia, FYR MKD
25
Madagascar MDG
Malawi MWI
Malaysia MYS
Maldives MDV
Mali MLI
Malta MLT
Mauritania MRT
Mauritius MUS
Mexico MEX
Moldova MDA
Mongolia MNG
Morocco MAR
Mozambique MOZ
Myanmar MYN
Namibia NAM
Nepal NPL
Netherlands NLD
New Zealand NZL
Nicaragua NIC
Niger NGR
Nigeria NGA
Norway NOR
Oman OMN
Panama PAN
Papua New Guinea PNG
Paraguay PRY
Peru PER
Philippines PHL
Poland POL
Portugal PRT
Qatar QAT
Romania ROM
Russian Federation RUS
Rwanda RWA
Saudi Arabia SAU
Senegal SEN
Serbia SRB
Sierra Leone SRL
Singapore SGP
Slovak Republic SVK
Slovenia SVN
South Africa ZAF
Spain ESP
Sri Lanka LKA
Sudan SDN
Swaziland SWA
Sweden SWE
Switzerland CHE
Syrian Arab Republic SYR
Tajikistan TJK
Tanzania TZA
Thailand THA
Timor-Leste TMP
26
Togo TOG
Trinidad and Tobago TTO
Tunisia TUN
Turkey TUR
Turkmenistan TRK
Uganda UGA
Ukraine UKR
United Arab Emirates ARE
United Kingdom GBR
United States USA
Uruguay URY
Uzbekistan UZB
Venezuela, RB VEN
Vietnam VNM
Yemen, Rep. YEM
Zambia ZMB
Zimbabwe ZBW