Part 1:Measuring the Global Gender Gap for the Legislators,senior officials and managers indicator, the gap by 5%and are now 6%and 5%away from parity highlighting the need for improved data collection and respectively.Sub-Saharan Africa has the most persistent comparability in international statistics. gap,which has closed by a mere 2%,and it is 15%away On the Labour force participation of women indicator from parity.Figure 23(page 35)displays the regions across the past 10 years,81%of countries have made relative positions in the Educational Attainment subindex. progress.Nepal has had the largest increase of female Chad has closed 59%of its education gender gap, labour force participation.In 2006 it had closed 64%of 12%over the past year by making strong improvements in the gender gap on this indicator;in the past 10 years literacy and secondary education.Burkina Faso and Nepal it has improved by 30%(from 0.637 to 0.935).Other have closed their education gender gaps by 18-19%over countries that have shown particularly strong growth the past 10 years.Nepal has seen strong improvements include Botswana,Nigeria,Spain,Nicaragua,South Africa in its tertiary education rates.Yemen,Pakistan and Saudi and Lesotho.Guatemala and Bahrain have both made Arabia have made smaller,yet strong improvements in their strong progress relative to their starting points(16%and own education gaps of 10-12%.This brings Saudi Arabia 13%respectively).On the other end of the scale,Iran has on the verge of parity-it has currently closed 99%of its increased its labour force participation gender gap the education gender gap.On the other end of the spectrum, most-by about 30%in the past 10 years(0.520 to 0.229) Malaysia,Albania,the Dominican Republic and Nigeria Similarly,Mali,Argentina and Mauritania have increased have all increased their education gender gaps by more their labour force participation gender gap by more than than 10%.The Dominican Republic has reversed out of 20%.Of the three,Mali used to perform particularly well in parity while Albania has seen a decrease in the degree 2006,when it had closed 86%of the gender gap on that to which women take part in tertiary education,a gap indicator.Among the BRICS,South Africa has improved its increase of 26%.In Malaysia,the decrease is across both labour force participation gap by 18%,Japan by 11%,while secondary and tertiary education.Figure 28(page 37) India has widened its gap by 7%. displays selected countries trajectories between 2006 and When it comes to women's ability to rise to positions 2015 on the Educational Attainment subindex. of authority,over the past 10 years,68%of countries Among the 109 countries we have covered for the have made progress towards a more equal cohort of past 10 years,30%of countries have closed the Health legislators,senior officials and mangers.During this and Survival Gap to date.In 2006,this figure stood at only period,Colombia and Ghana have both reached parity, 18%of countries.In the last 10 years,the health gap has with scores of 0.613 and 0.515,respectively.Ghana,in increased by a small fraction:while in 2006 the health gap particular,has made a significant jump of 50%.In 2006. was closed by 96.2%,today it is closed by 95.6%.The France had a notably low level(0.075)of female legislators, Asia and Pacific region has seen a gender gap increase senior officials and managers.Yet it has made significant of 1%-unsurprising,since large and populous economies improvements-rising by 41%.On skilled roles-specifically such as India and China are the worst performers in professional and technical workers-50%of countries this area.North America and the Middle East have have reached parity.Of that cohort,36%were already at both stepped back from near parity by 0.5%and 0.3% parity in 2006.Among those who have recently reached respective.North America's widening health gap is in parity are Bulgaria-spanning a gap of 48%-as well as contrast to the region with which it used to share the top the Dominican Republic and Guatemala.France is nearing spot in health in 2006,Latin America and the Caribbean. parity,from an initial score in 2006 of 0.667.In 2006, Latin America and the Caribbean currently leads the Health both Nepal and Bahrain had only closed 22-24%of their and Survival subindex,and has kept its general position gender gaps for professional and technical workers.Ten at near parity,having closed 98%of its health and survival years later,they have both improved past the 42%mark gap.Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe and Central Asia and are on the way to closing half of the gap.A number of are the only regions that have seen a decrease in their countries are significantly overshooting parity,with around gender gap.Sub-Saharan Africa's gap decrease has seen 12%of the 109 having a ratio higher than 1.5 women it overtake Middle East and North Africa in this aspect of men.These include Lithuania,Moldova,Venezuela,Latvia, gender parity.Figure 24(page 35)displays the Health the Russian Federation,Ukraine,Estonia,Mongolia and and Survival subindex evolution by region. Georgia. The countries that improved the most in health are On education,to date 20%of countries have closed Nepal,Pakistan,Bangladesh and Botswana(starting from their education gender gaps,and 39%have narrowed a score of roughly 0.95,or a 3%gap from parity).The the gap down to 1%.In 2006 only 14%had fully closed countries that have declined the furthest on the Health and their gender gaps on education.Europe and Central Asia, Survival subindex are India,China and Albania.Since 2006, North America,and Latin America and the Caribbean are India and China have widened their gender gaps by around a fraction of a percent away from full parity (having grown 2%and,today,the countries with the largest gender gaps by 0.7%,1.5%and 1.3%respectively).The Middle East in this subindex are,in fact,China,India and Albania(6%, and North Africa,and Asia and the Pacific have closed 4%,3%away from parity,respectively).Figure 29(page The Global Gender Gap Report 2015 33
The Global Gender Gap Report 2015 | 33 Part 1: Measuring the Global Gender Gap for the Legislators, senior officials and managers indicator, highlighting the need for improved data collection and comparability in international statistics. On the Labour force participation of women indicator across the past 10 years, 81% of countries have made progress. Nepal has had the largest increase of female labour force participation. In 2006 it had closed 64% of the gender gap on this indicator; in the past 10 years it has improved by 30% (from 0.637 to 0.935). Other countries that have shown particularly strong growth include Botswana, Nigeria, Spain, Nicaragua, South Africa and Lesotho. Guatemala and Bahrain have both made strong progress relative to their starting points (16% and 13% respectively). On the other end of the scale, Iran has increased its labour force participation gender gap the most—by about 30% in the past 10 years (0.520 to 0.229). Similarly, Mali, Argentina and Mauritania have increased their labour force participation gender gap by more than 20%. Of the three, Mali used to perform particularly well in 2006, when it had closed 86% of the gender gap on that indicator. Among the BRICS, South Africa has improved its labour force participation gap by 18%, Japan by 11%, while India has widened its gap by 7%. When it comes to women’s ability to rise to positions of authority, over the past 10 years, 68% of countries have made progress towards a more equal cohort of legislators, senior officials and mangers. During this period, Colombia and Ghana have both reached parity, with scores of 0.613 and 0.515, respectively. Ghana, in particular, has made a significant jump of 50%. In 2006, France had a notably low level (0.075) of female legislators, senior officials and managers. Yet it has made significant improvements—rising by 41%. On skilled roles—specifically professional and technical workers—50% of countries have reached parity. Of that cohort, 36% were already at parity in 2006. Among those who have recently reached parity are Bulgaria—spanning a gap of 48%—as well as the Dominican Republic and Guatemala. France is nearing parity, from an initial score in 2006 of 0.667. In 2006, both Nepal and Bahrain had only closed 22–24% of their gender gaps for professional and technical workers. Ten years later, they have both improved past the 42% mark and are on the way to closing half of the gap. A number of countries are significantly overshooting parity, with around 12% of the 109 having a ratio higher than 1.5 women / men. These include Lithuania, Moldova, Venezuela, Latvia, the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Estonia, Mongolia and Georgia. On education, to date 20% of countries have closed their education gender gaps, and 39% have narrowed the gap down to 1%. In 2006 only 14% had fully closed their gender gaps on education. Europe and Central Asia, North America, and Latin America and the Caribbean are a fraction of a percent away from full parity (having grown by 0.7%, 1.5% and 1.3% respectively). The Middle East and North Africa, and Asia and the Pacific have closed the gap by 5% and are now 6% and 5% away from parity respectively. Sub-Saharan Africa has the most persistent gap, which has closed by a mere 2%, and it is 15% away from parity. Figure 23 (page 35) displays the regions relative positions in the Educational Attainment subindex. Chad has closed 59% of its education gender gap, 12% over the past year by making strong improvements in literacy and secondary education. Burkina Faso and Nepal have closed their education gender gaps by 18–19% over the past 10 years. Nepal has seen strong improvements in its tertiary education rates. Yemen, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have made smaller, yet strong improvements in their own education gaps of 10–12%. This brings Saudi Arabia on the verge of parity—it has currently closed 99% of its education gender gap. On the other end of the spectrum, Malaysia, Albania, the Dominican Republic and Nigeria have all increased their education gender gaps by more than 10%. The Dominican Republic has reversed out of parity while Albania has seen a decrease in the degree to which women take part in tertiary education, a gap increase of 26%. In Malaysia, the decrease is across both secondary and tertiary education. Figure 28 (page 37) displays selected countries trajectories between 2006 and 2015 on the Educational Attainment subindex. Among the 109 countries we have covered for the past 10 years, 30% of countries have closed the Health and Survival Gap to date. In 2006, this figure stood at only 18% of countries. In the last 10 years, the health gap has increased by a small fraction: while in 2006 the health gap was closed by 96.2%, today it is closed by 95.6%. The Asia and Pacific region has seen a gender gap increase of 1%—unsurprising, since large and populous economies such as India and China are the worst performers in this area. North America and the Middle East have both stepped back from near parity by 0.5% and 0.3% respective. North America’s widening health gap is in contrast to the region with which it used to share the top spot in health in 2006, Latin America and the Caribbean. Latin America and the Caribbean currently leads the Health and Survival subindex, and has kept its general position at near parity, having closed 98% of its health and survival gap. Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe and Central Asia are the only regions that have seen a decrease in their gender gap. Sub-Saharan Africa’s gap decrease has seen it overtake Middle East and North Africa in this aspect of gender parity. Figure 24 (page 35) displays the Health and Survival subindex evolution by region. The countries that improved the most in health are Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Botswana (starting from a score of roughly 0.95, or a 3% gap from parity). The countries that have declined the furthest on the Health and Survival subindex are India, China and Albania. Since 2006, India and China have widened their gender gaps by around 2% and, today, the countries with the largest gender gaps in this subindex are, in fact, China, India and Albania (6%, 4%, 3% away from parity, respectively). Figure 29 (page
Part 1:Measuring the Global Gender Gap Figure 21:Global Index Evolution 2006-2015,by region 0.8 0.7 8850-00 10 0.6 -Sub-Saharan Africa -Europe and Central Asia -Latin America and the Caribbean 一North America 一Asia and the Pacific -Middle East and North Africa ---Worid 0.5 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source:Global Gender Gap Index 2015. Notes:Regional classification details are in Appendix A.The Y axis has been truncated to enhance readability. 37)displays selected countries'progress towards gender Finland and Norway are both highly placed and have parity on the Health and Survival subindex. made strong improvement.Slovenia has made the largest On average,the political participation gap has closed increase from the lowest base.In 2006,it had closed the fastest in the past 10 years-by approximately 9% 15%of its political gender gap;today the figure stands (0.144 to 0.236).However,this gap is still wide across at 38%.It is followed by France,which had closed 10% the world.Asia and the Pacific has a political gender gap and now has gone on to close 37%.Iceland significantly that is narrower than the world average,and has closed outperforms all other countries.Iceland had closed 46%in by over 10%in the last 10 years,but it still has to close 2006,and in the past 10 years it has come to close 72%. 74%of the gap to reach parity.Until 2009,Europe and Bolivia's improvement stems from the larger participation of Central Asia was growing at a similar rate;however,the women in parliament,where the country has now reached region has fallen behind the curve and currently performs parity-up from 34%in the past-but is offset by its below Asia and the Pacific.Similarly,North America lags ministerial score halving since 2012. behind Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa for women's Only two countries have gender equality in ministerial political participation after a brief increase in 2010-2011. roles currently,the same as in 2006.France's recent The momentary increase did not leave lasting change, mprovement is largely due to a parity cabinet,similar to its leaving Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa to pull rise in 2008 and 2009.In 2006,Spain had achieved parity significantly into the lead.Latin America has experienced on the Women in ministerial positions indicator,as had healthy progress,closing 9%of its political gender gap Sweden.While Sweden has sustained this position,Spain's over 10 years;it now has,on average,closed 20%of its ministerial parity has dropped sharply.It currently stands gender gap.On the other end of the spectrum,the Middle 56%away from parity.Nicaragua's progress across this East and North Africa has the widest remaining political indicator has been stable thus far. gap,having barely closed 9%of its gender gap.However, Ten years ago,62%of countries had never had a countries across the Middle East and North Africa have female head of state,today that figure has dropped to collectively closed 6%of the political gender gap since 50%.Australia,Brazil,Costa Rica,Denmark,Kyrgyz 2006,the second-largest progress among all regions. Republic,Malawi,Mali,Mauritius,Moldova,Slovak Figure 25(page 35)shows the Political Empowerment Republic,Slovenia,Thailand,and Trinidad and Tobago subindex evolution by region. have all elected a female head of state for the first time While the overall trajectory on the Political since 2006.Countries'performance on the Political Empowerment subindex has been positive,it has the most Empowerment subindex is closely related to the presence volatility across countries as political roles and systems are of political quotas.For example,Nicaragua,Bolivia and subject to variation.Among the most improved countries France have all put into place voluntary political quotas are Bolivia,Slovenia,Nicaragua,Iceland and France in the Figure 30(page 37)displays the evolution of selected top five,with Italy and Switzerland close behind.They have countries within the Political Empowerment subindex. closed between 20 and 35%of their gender gaps.Iceland. 34 The Global Gender Gap Report 2015
Part 1: Measuring the Global Gender Gap 34 | The Global Gender Gap Report 2015 37) displays selected countries’ progress towards gender parity on the Health and Survival subindex. On average, the political participation gap has closed the fastest in the past 10 years—by approximately 9% (0.144 to 0.236). However, this gap is still wide across the world. Asia and the Pacific has a political gender gap that is narrower than the world average, and has closed by over 10% in the last 10 years, but it still has to close 74% of the gap to reach parity. Until 2009, Europe and Central Asia was growing at a similar rate; however, the region has fallen behind the curve and currently performs below Asia and the Pacific. Similarly, North America lags behind Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa for women’s political participation after a brief increase in 2010–2011. The momentary increase did not leave lasting change, leaving Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa to pull significantly into the lead. Latin America has experienced healthy progress, closing 9% of its political gender gap over 10 years; it now has, on average, closed 20% of its gender gap. On the other end of the spectrum, the Middle East and North Africa has the widest remaining political gap, having barely closed 9% of its gender gap. However, countries across the Middle East and North Africa have collectively closed 6% of the political gender gap since 2006, the second-largest progress among all regions. Figure 25 (page 35) shows the Political Empowerment subindex evolution by region. While the overall trajectory on the Political Empowerment subindex has been positive, it has the most volatility across countries as political roles and systems are subject to variation. Among the most improved countries are Bolivia, Slovenia, Nicaragua, Iceland and France in the top five, with Italy and Switzerland close behind. They have closed between 20 and 35% of their gender gaps. Iceland, Finland and Norway are both highly placed and have made strong improvement. Slovenia has made the largest increase from the lowest base. In 2006, it had closed 15% of its political gender gap; today the figure stands at 38%. It is followed by France, which had closed 10% and now has gone on to close 37%. Iceland significantly outperforms all other countries. Iceland had closed 46% in 2006, and in the past 10 years it has come to close 72%. Bolivia’s improvement stems from the larger participation of women in parliament, where the country has now reached parity—up from 34% in the past—but is offset by its ministerial score halving since 2012. Only two countries have gender equality in ministerial roles currently, the same as in 2006. France’s recent improvement is largely due to a parity cabinet, similar to its rise in 2008 and 2009. In 2006, Spain had achieved parity on the Women in ministerial positions indicator, as had Sweden. While Sweden has sustained this position, Spain’s ministerial parity has dropped sharply. It currently stands 56% away from parity. Nicaragua’s progress across this indicator has been stable thus far. Ten years ago, 62% of countries had never had a female head of state, today that figure has dropped to 50%. Australia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Denmark, Kyrgyz Republic, Malawi, Mali, Mauritius, Moldova, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Thailand, and Trinidad and Tobago have all elected a female head of state for the first time since 2006. Countries’ performance on the Political Empowerment subindex is closely related to the presence of political quotas. For example, Nicaragua, Bolivia and France have all put into place voluntary political quotas. Figure 30 (page 37) displays the evolution of selected countries within the Political Empowerment subindex. Source: Global Gender Gap Index 2015. Notes: Regional classification details are in Appendix A. The Y axis has been truncated to enhance readability. Figure 21: Global Index Evolution 2006–2015, by region 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.8 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Global Gender Gap Index score (0.0–1.0 scale) World Sub-Saharan Africa Europe and Central Asia Latin America and the Caribbean North America Asia and the Pacific Middle East and North Africa
Part 1:Measuring the Global Gender Gap Figure 22:Economic Participation and Opportunity Figure 23:Educational Attainment subindex subindex evolution 2006-2015,by region evolution 2006-2015,by region 0.8 1.0 0.9 《aeas06. e 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.5 2006200720082009201020112012201320142015 2006200720082009201020112012201320142015 Figure 24:Health and Survival subindex Figure 25:Political Empowerment subindex evolution 2006-2015,by region evolution 2006-2015,by region 0 0.9 0.4 0.8 0.7 (epas 01-0'0 aos xepupans 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.0 2006200720082009201020112012201320142015 2006200720082009201020112012201320142015 -Sub-Saharan Africa -Europe and Central Asia -Latin America and the Caribbean 一North America 一Asia and the Pacific -Middle East and North Africa ---World Source (Figures 22-25):Global Gender Gap Index 2015. Notes (Figures22-5):details are.truncated once readablty. THE CASE FOR GENDER EQUALITY bearing on how competitive a country may become or how The most important determinant of a country's efficient a company may be.There is clearly also a values- competitiveness is its human talent-the skills and based case for gender equality:women are one-half of the productivity of its workforce.Similarly,an organization's world's population and deserve equal access to health, performance is determined by the human capital that it education,economic participation and earning potential possesses and its ability to use this resource efficiently. and political decision-making power.Gender equality is Ensuring the healthy development and appropriate use thus fundamental to whether and how societies thrive. of half of the world's available talent pool thus has a vast The Global Gender Gap Report 2015 35
The Global Gender Gap Report 2015 | 35 Part 1: Measuring the Global Gender Gap THE CASE FOR GENDER EQUALITY The most important determinant of a country’s competitiveness is its human talent—the skills and productivity of its workforce. Similarly, an organization’s performance is determined by the human capital that it possesses and its ability to use this resource efficiently. Ensuring the healthy development and appropriate use of half of the world’s available talent pool thus has a vast bearing on how competitive a country may become or how efficient a company may be. There is clearly also a valuesbased case for gender equality: women are one-half of the world’s population and deserve equal access to health, education, economic participation and earning potential, and political decision-making power. Gender equality is thus fundamental to whether and how societies thrive. Figure 22: Economic Participation and Opportunity subindex evolution 2006–2015, by region Figure 23: Educational Attainment subindex evolution 2006–2015, by region Figure 24: Health and Survival subindex evolution 2006–2015, by region Figure 25: Political Empowerment subindex evolution 2006–2015, by region 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 World Sub-Saharan Africa North America Middle East and North Africa Latin America and the Carribbean Europe and Central Asia Asia and the Pacific 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Economic Participation and Opportunity subindex score (0.0–1.0 scale) Health and Survival subindex score (0.0–1.0 scale) 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Educational Attainment subindex score (0.0–1.0 scale) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Political Empowerment subindex score (0.0–1.0 scale) 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 World Sub-Saharan Africa Europe and Central Asia Latin America and the Caribbean North America Asia and the Pacific Middle East and North Africa Source (Figures 22–25): Global Gender Gap Index 2015. Notes (Figures 22–25): Regional classification details are in Appendix A. The Y axis has been truncated to enhance readability
Part 1:Measuring the Global Gender Gap Figure 31 (page 38)demonstrates the relationship Figure 26:Global Gender Gap Index evolution 2006-2015, between GDP per capita and the Global Gender Gap Index selected countries 2015.Figure 32 (page 38)shows the links between the Human Development Index 2014 and Global Gender Gap 工8S Index 2015 and Figure 33(page 39)illustrates the links between the Global Competitiveness Index 2015-2016 Nicaraqua:78% and Global Gender Gap Index 2015.The graphs confirm a South Africa:76% correlation between gender equality and GDP per capita, Bo75% Unrad States:74% the level of competitiveness and human development. The correlation is evident despite the fact that the Global South Africa:71% Gender Gap Index(unlike other gender indexes)explicitly Russian Federation:68% e68% eliminates any direct impact of the absolute levels of any China:66% China 68% Nicaragua:bb of the indicators used in the Index (e.g.life expectancy, nndia:66% educational attainment,labour force participation),as apan:64 B0la:63% these may be impacted by the relative wealth of a country. India:60% While correlation does not prove causality,it is consistent with the theory and mounting evidence that empowering Pakistan:56% Nepal:55% women means a more efficient use of a nation's human Pakstan:54% capital endowment and that reducing gender inequality SdAa恤62% enhances productivity and economic growth. The Global Gender Gap Index takes into account four Yemen:48% critical areas when measuring the gaps between women 阳men:6% and men's access to resources and opportunities.For each of these areas,there are economic or societal gains from increased gender parity.This section summarizes L上上上1 06070809101112131415 some of the key research findings on the broader economic and societal case for gender equality.Figures 34 Source:Global Gender Gap Index 2015. through 39 (starting on page 39)display some of the key relationships. The multiplier effect of girls'education on several aspects of development as well as its impact on economic inequality is lower in countries where more women growth is now commonly accepted:education reduces have been engaged in public life.The breadth of issues high fertility rates,lowers infant and child mortality rates. women tend to advocate and prioritize investments lowers maternal mortality rates,increases labour force on,have broader societal implications relating to family participation rates and earnings,and fosters further life,health and education,thereby fostering greater educational investment in children.8 Therefore.the cost credibility in institutions and producing more democratic of girls'exclusion from education considerably hinders outcomes.13 There is also some evidence from India to the productive potential of an economy and its overall suggest that women in local government roles make development.In the Asia and the Pacific region specifically, decisions with better outcomes for communities than men it has been estimated that between US$16 billion to do when charged with budget decisions.14 They obtain US$30 billion is lost annually as a result of gender gaps in more resources for their constituencies despite having education.Investing in advancing girls'education would in significantly lower education and relevant labor market fact lead to lifetime earnings of today's cohort of girls of up experience.15 More equal female representation in political to 68%of annual GDP.Similarly,closing the inactivity rate bodies also affects the participation of women in the between girls and boys would also increase GDP by up to workforce,suggesting that greater participation of women 5.4%by some measures.10 in politics could serve as a policy tool to positively impact The impact of health on economic growth is also well labour force participation by increasing supply and demand documented.Studies have shown that a one-year increase of employment opportunities for women.16 in health expectancy could raise GDP by up to 4%.1 More Having more women in the workforce contributes spending on health significantly improves health outcomes, to economic performance through several pathways. which in turn contribute to reducing poverty and improving According to one study,greater female participation in the overall growth.Similar to education,investing in health and U.S.workforce since 1970 accounts for a quarter of current specifically in maternal,newborn and child health has a GDP).17 Another study indicates that the reduction in the multiplier effect.12 male-female employment gap has been an important driver There is a strong case for broadening women's of European economic growth in the last decade.Closing representation in politics.Research has found that this gap would have massive economic implications for 36 The Global Gender Gap Report 2015
Part 1: Measuring the Global Gender Gap 36 | The Global Gender Gap Report 2015 Figure 31 (page 38) demonstrates the relationship between GDP per capita and the Global Gender Gap Index 2015. Figure 32 (page 38) shows the links between the Human Development Index 2014 and Global Gender Gap Index 2015 and Figure 33 (page 39) illustrates the links between the Global Competitiveness Index 2015–2016 and Global Gender Gap Index 2015. The graphs confirm a correlation between gender equality and GDP per capita, the level of competitiveness and human development. The correlation is evident despite the fact that the Global Gender Gap Index (unlike other gender indexes) explicitly eliminates any direct impact of the absolute levels of any of the indicators used in the Index (e.g. life expectancy, educational attainment, labour force participation), as these may be impacted by the relative wealth of a country. While correlation does not prove causality, it is consistent with the theory and mounting evidence that empowering women means a more efficient use of a nation’s human capital endowment and that reducing gender inequality enhances productivity and economic growth. The Global Gender Gap Index takes into account four critical areas when measuring the gaps between women and men’s access to resources and opportunities. For each of these areas, there are economic or societal gains from increased gender parity. This section summarizes some of the key research findings on the broader economic and societal case for gender equality. Figures 34 through 39 (starting on page 39) display some of the key relationships. The multiplier effect of girls’ education on several aspects of development as well as its impact on economic growth is now commonly accepted: education reduces high fertility rates, lowers infant and child mortality rates, lowers maternal mortality rates, increases labour force participation rates and earnings, and fosters further educational investment in children.8 Therefore, the cost of girls’ exclusion from education considerably hinders the productive potential of an economy and its overall development. In the Asia and the Pacific region specifically, it has been estimated that between US$16 billion to US$30 billion is lost annually as a result of gender gaps in education.9 Investing in advancing girls’ education would in fact lead to lifetime earnings of today’s cohort of girls of up to 68% of annual GDP. Similarly, closing the inactivity rate between girls and boys would also increase GDP by up to 5.4% by some measures.10 The impact of health on economic growth is also well documented. Studies have shown that a one-year increase in health expectancy could raise GDP by up to 4%.11 More spending on health significantly improves health outcomes, which in turn contribute to reducing poverty and improving overall growth. Similar to education, investing in health and specifically in maternal, newborn and child health has a multiplier effect.12 There is a strong case for broadening women’s representation in politics. Research has found that inequality is lower in countries where more women have been engaged in public life. The breadth of issues women tend to advocate and prioritize investments on, have broader societal implications relating to family life, health and education, thereby fostering greater credibility in institutions and producing more democratic outcomes.13 There is also some evidence from India to suggest that women in local government roles make decisions with better outcomes for communities than men do when charged with budget decisions.14 They obtain more resources for their constituencies despite having significantly lower education and relevant labor market experience.15 More equal female representation in political bodies also affects the participation of women in the workforce, suggesting that greater participation of women in politics could serve as a policy tool to positively impact labour force participation by increasing supply and demand of employment opportunities for women.16 Having more women in the workforce contributes to economic performance through several pathways. According to one study, greater female participation in the U.S. workforce since 1970 accounts for a quarter of current GDP).17 Another study indicates that the reduction in the male-female employment gap has been an important driver of European economic growth in the last decade. Closing this gap would have massive economic implications for '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 Yemen: 46% United States: 74% Sweden: 81% Finland: 80% Sri Lanka: 69% Average: 65% South Africa: 76% Yemen: 48% United States: 70% Sweden: 82% Sri Lanka: 72% Average:68% South Africa: 71% Saudi Arabia: 60% Russian Federation: 68% Pakistan: 56% Norway: 85% Finland: 85% Saudi Arabia: 52% Russian Federation: 69% Pakistan: 54% Norway: 80% Nicaragua: 66% Nepal: 66% Japan: 67% India: 66% China: 68% Brazil: 69% Bolivia: 75% Nicaragua: 78% Nepal: 55% Japan: 64% India: 60% China: 66% Brazil: 65% Bolivia: 63% Source: Global Gender Gap Index 2015. Figure 26: Global Gender Gap Index evolution 2006-2015, selected countries
Part 1:Measuring the Global Gender Gap Figure 27:Economic Participation and Opportunity Figure 28:Educational Attainment subindex subindex evolution 2006-2015,selected countries evolution 2006-2015,selected countries Norway:87% tsianFedereiar,10on China,Japan,South Aica:99% Albania:97% Tanzania:81% --·Averaga:95% Nepat:92% United States:76% India:90% Tarczania:71% Russian Federuion:70% India:82% Burkina Faso:83% China:66% ra过64% China:62% :63% Brazt:60% South Africa:56% Average:5o Yemen:72% Jp心t5巧% 5044 Guatemala:44% India:40% Yemen:609 Saudi Arabia:39% 0at59% Bahrain:38% 1n:36% Chad:47% Saud Arabia 上111 06070809101112131415 060708091011121314'15 Figure 29:Health and Survival subindex Figure 30:Political Empowerment subindex evolution 2006-2015,selected countries evolution 2006-2015,selected countries Brazil:98% lceland 72% Yemen:97% dStates:97% Mali:97% 7% Finland:61% Average:96% Nicaragu51% Spein:42% Sri Lanka:37% South Airi33% Spain:33% China:94% 一ndit949% India:23% Aerage:24% Nicaragua:19% Sni Lanka:19% United St tes:16% China:16% t12% ap2n:10% Georgia:92% China:94% Japan:7% 06070809101112131415 5a0%0607'08'0910112131415 Source (Figures 27-30):Global Gender Gap Index 2015. The Global Gender Gap Report 2015 37
The Global Gender Gap Report 2015 | 37 Part 1: Measuring the Global Gender Gap Figure 27: Economic Participation and Opportunity subindex evolution 2006-2015, selected countries '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 Bahrain: 38% Bahrain: 60% United States: 83% Sweden: 73% Jordan: 44% Average: 56% South Africa: 67% United States: 76% Sweden: 84% Jordan: 35% South Africa: 56% Average: 59% Saudi Arabia: 39% Russian Federation: 70% Norway: 87% Tanzania: 71% Tanzania: 81% Saudi Arabia: 24% Russian Federation: 73% Norway: 73% Japan: 61% Brazil: 64% Japan: 55% Brazil: 60% China: 62% China: 66% Iran: 36% India: 40% Guatemala: 44% Guatemala: 63% India: 38% Iran: 36% '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 Average: 95% Yemen: 72% Russian Federation: 100% Average: 92% Nepal: 92% Yemen: 60% United States: 98% Nepal: 73% India: 82% Ethiopia: 74% China: 96% Chad: 47% Burkina Faso: 65% Brazil, Russian Federation, United States: 100% India: 90% Ethiopia: 74% China, Japan, South Africa: 99% Chad: 59% Burkina Faso: 83% Brazil: 97% Albania: 97% Albania, Japan, South Africa: 99% Figure 28: Educational Attainment subindex evolution 2006–2015, selected countries '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 Average: 96% Yemen: 97% United States: 97% South Africa: 98% Saudi Arabia: 97% Russian Federation: 98% Pakistan: 97% Nepal: 97% Mali: 95% Japan: 98% India: 96% Georgia: 92% China: 94% Brazil: 98% Botswana: 96% Bangladesh: 95% Albania: 95% Average: 96% Yemen: 98% United States: 98% South Africa: 98% Saudi Arabia: 98% Russian Federation: 98% Pakistan: 95% Nepal: 95% Mali: 97% Japan: 98% India: 94% Georgia: 97% China: 94% Brazil: 98% Botswana: 97% Bangladesh: 97% Albania: 96% Figure 29: Health and Survival subindex evolution 2006–2015, selected countries '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 Average: 14% United States: 10% Sri Lanka: 37% Spain: 42% South Africa: 33% Slovenia: 6% Saudi Arabia: 0% Russian Federation: 3% Paraguay: 14% Nicaragua: 19% Kuwait: 0% Japan: 7% India: 23% Iceland: 46% Hungary: 7% Finland: 47% China: 11% Brazil: 6% Bolivia: 41% Bolivia: 9% Average: 24% United States: 16% Sri Lanka: 19% Spain: 33% South Africa: 40% Slovenia: 39% Saudi Arabia: 8% Russian Federation: 7% Paraguay: 8% Nicaragua: 51% Kuwait: 2% Japan: 10% India: 43% Iceland: 72% Hungary: 3% Finland: 61% China: 16% Brazil: 12% Figure 30: Political Empowerment subindex evolution 2006–2015, selected countries Source (Figures 27–30): Global Gender Gap Index 2015