Introduction

Girls are forced into marriage with their violators, with little or no control over their own
persons. Each year an estimated two million girls, usually aged 4 to 8, are forcibly
subjected to female genital mutilation (FG!, which routinely leads to death, chronic
infection and bleeding, nerve tumors, obstructed childbirth, painful scarring, etc."lthough
most prevalent in "frica and the iddle East, the practice of some form of FG has been
reported among immigrant communities in parts of "sia and the #aci$c, %orth and &outh
"merica and Europe. 'hile we lac( reliable data on violence against women, we have
incorporated several other variables related to the dimension of health and well)being.
&ince women are often the majority of the victims of poverty, we have included data from
the E*ecutive +pinion &urvey on the e,ectiveness of governments- e,orts to reduce
poverty and ine.uality. /n addition, we include the adolescent fertility rate as an indicator
of health ris(s among women aged 01 to 02 years, and as an indicator of the lac( of other
choices available to young women. Finally, we include reproductive health data, such as
the percentage of births attended by s(illed health sta,, and maternal and infant
mortality ratios. &ince these variables are particularly a,ected by the level of poverty in a
given nation, i.e. poor health facilities in general as opposed to poor reproductive health
facilities, we have adjusted these data by the number of physicians available per 0,333
people, as an indicator of the .uality of the country-s health system in general. /n this
way, we do not penali4e developing countries in particular, but all those nations that
provide poor reproductive health facilities to women, given the e*isting health
infrastructure.
Calculating the Scores
5he goal of our methodology is to provide cross)country comparisons, a broadly
comprehensive assessment of the e*tent to which countries are capitali4ing on the full
potential of their societies. 5his is obtained by combining raw $gures on the national
economy, politics and education with the perceptions of the business community on the
employment of women in their respective countries. 'e have attempted to consolidate in
one inde* several dimensions of gender e.uality, including those that form part of the
prominent inde*es currently present in the literature, most notably the political factors
that enter the 6%7# Gender Empowerment easure and the literacy and 8ealth related
factors that form part of the Gender)9elated 7evelopment /nde*. /n addition, we provide a
measurement of the participation per se of women in economic activity, as contrasted
with the opportunities available to them once they become participants in the labor force.
5he ran(ing of the 18 countries in our study is by no means inclusive of all the issues that
a,ect women. 5here are other approaches to prioriti4ing global gender ine.uality in the
current literature, such as that of the 6nited %ations illennium #roject-s 5as( Force on
Gender E.uality, where it is de$ned in terms of capabilities (education, health and
nutrition!, access to resources and opportunities (income, employment, property! and
security (vulnerability to violence!. 8owever, since our wor( is e*clusively .uantitative,
data availability has imposed limitations on our choice of variables. For e*ample,
insu:cient global data on violence against women prevented us from including this
variable in the ;health and well)being< dimension, but does not negate the importance of
this factor in capturing gender e.uality. %evertheless, the inde* provides valuable
comparisons across countries in economic, political, health and educational realms. 5he
set of 18 countries covered in the current study includes all =3 +E>7 countries and ?8
others from the ;emerging mar(et< world. +verall, the set of countries covers much of
Europe and %orth "merica, in addition to providing relevant e*amples from "sia, @atin
"merica, "frica and the iddle East. 5he e*istence of reliable data has been the main
consideration in our choice of countries, and lac( of such data has necessitated omitting
many countries from the developing world. 5he data used in this study come from publicly
available sources, including the World Development Indicators of the 'orld Aan(, and the
Human Development Report of 6%7#, as well as the annual Executive Opinion Survey of
the 'orld Economic Forum. /n ?334, the Executive Opinion Survey recorded the opinions
of nearly 2,333 business leaders in 034 countries. 9espondents were as(ed to record their
views on the importance of a broad range of factors central to creating a sound business
environment, including the .uality of $scal management, labour practices, the .uality of
the country-s infrastructure and its educational institutions. For e*ample, one of the
variables included in the Economic +pportunity category (see "ppendi*!, the ;impact of
maternity law son the hiring of women<, was derived directly from the following &urvey
.uestionB
/n your country, maternity lawsB
0C impede the hiring of women
DC are not a hindrance for hiring women
"s described earlier, the .uestions from the E*ecutive +pinion &urvey included in this
study have a similar format and use a 0 to D scale. 5he mean response of all respondents
in a particular country is the $nal score reported for that country on the relevant variable.
>learly, the ;hard< data ta(en from other international organi4ations is reported on
di,erent scales or units. 5o ma(e all data comparable, hard data was normali4ed to a 0 to
D scale, with the best value in each category being allotted a D, and the worst value a 0.
For e*ample, out of the 18 countries covered by the study, Egypt had the shortest
maternity leave allowed (appro*imately D wee(s! and therefore Egypt was allotted a 0,
while &weden had the longest leave (1? wee(s! and was therefore allotted a D. "ll other
countries were assigned a value between 0 and D. &imilar methods for normali4ing hard
data have been used in several previous reports of the Forum-s Global >ompetitiveness
#rogramme. +nce both survey and hard data are on the same scale, the scores for each
country are calculated by ta(ing the unweighted mean of all the variables within a
particular category. Finally, the overall scores for each country are calculated as an
unweighted average of the scores obtained in each of the $ve categories. &ince all $ve of
these dimensions are ine*tricably lin(ed, it is essentialE ultimately, that gender e.uality is
achieved in all of them. For e*ample, e.ual educational opportunities cannot be e,ective,
if women are barred entry into the wor(force. Entering the wor(force, in and of itself, does
not mean that women will not be ghettoi4ed or encounter a ;glass)ceilingE< having wor(
of whatever (ind may be immaterial, if the conditions under which it must be endured are
intolerable or life threatening, or if it must be sustained in the face of overwhelming
additional burdens beyond the hours of paid labour. 5he disproportionate representation
of elderly women among the poor means that economic participation may mean little, if
the ta* regime does not ta(e into account income disparities and the di,ering capacities
of women and men to contribute to an old age safety net. For these reasons, we have
assigned e.ual weights to all $ve dimensions when calculating the $nal scores as well as
within each dimension when adding the scores obtained on each variable. 5hus, however
di:cult comparisons may be, measuring the gender gap as well as possible, in each of
these dimensions, both within and between countries, provides guidance to policy)ma(ers
as to where e,orts must be made in each country.
The Gender Gap Rankings
Countr
y
Overa
ll
rank
Overa
ll
score
Economic
participati
on
Economic
opportuni
ty
Political
empowerm
ent
Education
al
attainme
nt
Healt
h
and
well
!ein
g
"#$% $& '( ') '& &&
"#$%
*( *' '+ $" *(
"#',
$% '' ") ', "&
"#'+
$* *% '' '% '$
"#'*
") &" $* "" $)
"#'&
'' ') $% '$ **
"#*(
'+ *& $, *, $"
"#*)
', '$ '& '' $&
"#*,
$' "$ *' $, "'
"#&) "' $$ $+ ') *,
*#(+ $) "* $) '" '"
*#(% $" $' ", $) ""
*#+, ** $) $" $$ $%
*#") $, $% $$ $+ '(
Country
5he preceding table illustrates the overall ran(ings, as well as the scores obtained in the
$ve dimensions surveyed. &cores for the developing and middle)income countries clearly
demonstrate that even the most basic criteria for gender e.uality are unmet, especially
those concerning maternal health and primary education. oreover, while high income
countries, such as those in the +E>7, have made great progress over the past half
century in removing some fundamental gender biases, they continue to display signi$cant
disparities in the opportunities presented to men and women in the wor(place and in the
political realm. %ot surprisingly, the top $ve places are occupied by %ordic countries,
characteri4ed by strongly liberal societies, protection of minority rights and
comprehensive welfare systems. 'hile women in these countries clearly have access to a
wider spectrum of educational, political and wor( opportunities and enjoy a higher
standard of living than women in other parts of the world, it is interesting to note that the
rates of economic participation in some of these countries are not necessarily the highest
in the world. For e*ample, although %orway and /celand occupy the second and third
places in the overall ran(ing, they hold ran(s of 0= and 0D in terms of economic
participation. 5his is not necessarily the result of barriers to women-s entry to the
wor(force, since it is certainly the case that women in some developed countries are in
the fortunate position of being able to choose not to wor( outside their homes. /t is a
potential caveat of the economic participation methodology that it does not ta(e into
account those who may voluntarily choose not to participate. 8owever, it should be noted
that while some women may indeed have chosen to ;opt out,< that choice is usually made
in a structure where wor( family issues are seen as problems primarily facing women,
while decision)ma(ing structures are dominated by men. 5hese are followed by a number
of ;woman)friendly< nations such as %ew Fealand, >anada, the 6G, Germany and
"ustralia. &everal Eastern European and transition economies place well, appearing
among the top ?1. 5his is not too surprising, considering that these countries subscribed
for long periods of time in recent history to a socialist ideology, which, however nominally,
encouraged a ;wor(er)woman< notion of e.uality, albeit one in which women had to do
everythingB all the wor( inside the home, while at the same time participating in industry
and all the professions. 5he most notable of these are @atvia (00!, @ithuania (0?! and
Estonia (01!, the $rst two coming ahead of France (0=! and all three appearing ahead of
the 6nited &tates (0D!. /t should be noted, however, that while these nations perform well
in terms of economic opportunity, economic participation and educational attainment,
they lag far behind in terms of health and well)being, ran(ing 48, 44 and 4H respectively.
5he poor reproductive health statistics, despite the profusion of health professionals,
indicate an ine:cient use of health facilities in providing reproductive healthcare to
women. 5he 6nited &tates (0D! performs particularly well on educational attainment and
only slightly less so on economic participation and political empowerment. 8owever, the
6nited &tates ran(s poorly on the speci$c dimensions of economic opportunity and health
and well)being, compromised by the meager maternity leave, lac( of maternity leave
bene$ts and limited government)provided childcare. oreover, the health and well)being
ran( of the 6nited &tates is brought down, in comparison with other developed nations,
by the large number of adolescents bearing children and by the high maternal mortality
ratioIespecially given the relatively high number of physicians available. 5he four
European nations &wit4erland (=4!, alta (4=!, /taly (41! and Greece (13! ran( low overall,
falling below @atin "merican nations such as >osta 9ica (08!, >olombia (=3! and 6ruguay
(=?!, and (in the case of the latter three! below "sian countries such as Aangladesh (=2!
and alaysia (43!, a clear reJection of the shortcomings of these so)called ;advanced<
nations in implementing gender e.uality. "lthough &wit4erland performs well on the
health and well)being dimension (D!, and relatively high on political empowerment (0D! I
a notable achievement for a country which gave women the right to vote and stand for
national election only in 02D0Ithe country lags behind not only in economic participation
and economic opportunity, but also in educational attainment, being one of the very few
developed nations where female enrolment rates are consistently lower than male rates.
"s is to be e*pected of countries notorious for their patriarchal cultures, /taly and Greece
each perform particularly poorly on the economic participation and economic opportunity
dimensions. 'hile the ran(ings spea( for themselves, they both con$rm many commonly
held beliefs, on the one hand, and dispel some prevailing myths, on the other. /n the
6nited &tates, for e*ample, the low ran( of 4H for economic opportunity appears to
corroborate the much)discussed ;glass ceiling.< "nd while "merican women have
generally high levels of economic participation, they also appear to be subject to a lac( of
opportunity for advancement in their careers. Given
>hina-s labor policies, it will probably not surprise many that >hina ran(s high in
economic participation (2!, but falls close to the bottom of the ran(ings in education (4H!
and political empowerment (43!. 'ith an overall ran( of ==, the >hinese government-s
much touted gender e.uality objective still falls far short of e*pectations. %onetheless,
>hina remains the highest ran(ing nation in "sia, followed by Kapan (=8!. 5he 9ussia
Federation (=0! shows similar results to those of >hina, boosted in the ran(ings by a high
economic participation (=!, but compromised by low political empowerment (4D! and
health and well)being (1D!. >osta 9ica (08! occupies $rst place in @atin "merica by a large
margin, followed by >olombia (=3!, 6ruguay (=?! and "rgentina (=1!. #eru (4D!, >hile (48!,
Lene4uela (42!, Ara4il (10! and e*ico (1?! all fare badly, due to poor performances on all
$ve areas of this inde*, with the e*ception of the economic opportunity ran(s of
Lene4uela (0=!, >hile (?3! and Ara4il (?0!. 5he problem here appears to be not in the lac(
of opportunity, once women have entered the wor(force, but rather in giving them access
to the educational training and basic rights, such as healthcare and political
empowerment, that will enable them to join the wor(force.
+ut of the seven predominantly uslim nations covered by the study, Aangladesh (=2!
and alaysia (43! outperform /ndonesia (4H!, while Kordan (11!, #a(istan (1H!, 5ur(ey (1D!
and Egypt (18! occupy the bottom four ran(s. 5here is little doubt that traditional, deeply
conservative attitudes regarding the role of women have made their integration into the
world of public decision)ma(ing e*tremely di:cult.40 "s the newly independent "rab
governments of Egypt and Kordan focused on moderni4ation more than half a century ago,
they neglected the needs of women, one of their most important assets.4? /n recent times
however, some progress has evidently been made. Aangladesh performs relatively well on
economic participation (08!, alaysia on health and well)being (01!, /ndonesia on
economic opportunity (?4! and 5ur(ey on economic participation (??!, no doubt reJecting
the economic freedoms that are increasingly available to women in /slamic countries.
'hile it is encouraging that the countries of the iddle East and %orth "frica region have
invested impressively in women-s education in recent years, increasing their productive
potential and earning capacity, it is clear from the low ran(s of these countries on labour
force participationIamong the lowest in the worldIthat the region is not bene$ting from
the potential returns on this investment. 7espite having rati$ed the Aeijing >onvention for
the Elimination of "ll Forms of 7iscrimination against 'omen, most of these nations lac( a
coherent strategy for empowering women. &uch a strategy will be necessary for building
on the achievements thus far, learning from past mista(es, and improving the future of
women in these economies.
Regional and Country Per-ormance
/n this section, we present graphic illustrations of our $ndings. 5he $rst si* charts below
show the performance of each region on the overall inde* as well as the $ve components.
5his is followed by $gures illustrating si* selected casesB &weden (0!, the 6nited Gingdom
(8!, the 6nited &tates (0D!, >hina (==!, Greece (13! and Egypt (18!, showing the relative
advantages and disadvantages within each nation. Finally, we provide two correlation
plotsB one showing the correlation between the Gender Gap /nde* ran(s and the Growth
>ompetitiveness /nde* ran(s for ?334M?331 and the other showing the correlation
between the Gender Gap /nde* ran(s and the log of the G7# per capita. 'hile correlation
does not necessarily entail causation, these comparisons provide a preliminary indication
of the lin( between women-s empowerment and a nation-s long)term growth potential.
.verage overall score !y region

Economic participation
Economic opportunity
Political empowerment
Educational attainment
Health and well!eing
Sweden /&0

1nited 2ingdom /)0

1nited States /&,0

China /""0

Greece /$%0

Egypt /$)0

Correlation3 Growth Competitiveness Inde4 /GCI0 ranks and
gender gap ranks
Correlation3 5og o- G6P per capita and gender gap ranks
Conclusions
5rue models of gender e.uality do not e*ist. Given the lamentable international picture,
no one who studies the gender gap can doubt that no country in the world has yet
managed to achieve it. 5rue, the %ordic countries are getting closer, leading the way in
providing women with a .uality of life almost e.ual to that of men, with almost
comparable levels of political participation, and with relatively e.ual educational and
economic opportunity and participation. Net, as this study indicates, other countries show
wide variation, lagging far behind in particular areas, some across all $ve dimensions.
"side from this general conclusion, and broad country comparisons, the data we have
presented here shed light on the disparities within countries, in some cases either
con$rming information gathered in other ways, or, in others, countering prevailing
assumptions. Ay identifying and .uantifying the gender gap, we hope to provide policy)
ma(ers with a tool o,ering direction and focus for the wor( of signi$cantly improving the
economic, political and social potential of all their citi4ens. /n addition, we hope that this
wor( provides the impetus for policy)ma(ers to strengthen their commitment to the idea
of women-s empowerment, and to concentrate the political will, energy and resources, in
concert with aid agencies and civil society organi4ations, to ma(e gender e.uality a
reality.
Re-erences
"lan Guttmacher /nstitute. 0222. /nternational Family #lanning #erspectives. ?1 (&upplement!. &=3M&=8.
"li)9i4a, &. ?331. ;'omen in the "rab 9egionB @earning from the #ast, #reparing for the Future.< #aper for
The Arab World Competitiveness Report!""#$ 'orld Economic Forum. /n press.
"mnesty /nternational. ?334. ;Female Genital utilation.< +nline atB
httpBOOwww.amnesty.orgOailibOintcamOfemgenOfgm0.htmPa0
Aridge. ?334. ;Gender and 7evelopmentB Gender and Audgets.< /n)Arief /ssue %o. 0?. +nline at
httpBOOwww.bridge.ids.ac.u(Odgb0?.html
Elson 7. ?33=. ;Gender mainstreaming and gender budgeting.< #aper presented at >onference of the
European >ommission ;Gender E.uality and Europe-s Future.< Arussels. arch.
Feminist 'omen-s 8ealth >entre. ?334. ;'orld 'ide &tatus of 'omen.< +nline atB
httpBOOwww.fwhc.orgOstats.htm
Ghosh, K. 0222. ;Economic Empowerment of 'omen.< #aper presented at 6% Economic and &ocial
>ommission for "sia and the #aci$c conference.
Gray, Francine du #lessi*, 0223. Soviet Women% Wal&in' The Ti'htrope. %ew Nor(B 7oubleday.
8ewlett, &ylvia "nn. ;E*ecutive 'omen and the yth of 8aving it "ll<. 8arvard Ausiness 9eview, "pril,
?33?.
8ill, ". and E. Ging. 0221. Women(s Education in Developin' Countries$ AaltimoreB Kohn 8op(ins 6niversity
#ress.
/nternational 8erald 5ribune, arch =3, ?331. ;&weden Faces Facts on Liolence "gainst 'omen< by @i4ette
"lvare4.
/nternational @abour +rgani4ation. 022D. ;aternity #rotection at 'or(.< 9eport L(0!, %o. /@>8D. Geneva.
/nternational @abour +rgani4ation. 0228.
/nter)#arliamentary 6nion. ?334. ;'omen in %ational #arliaments.< +nline at httpBOOwww.ipu.orgOwmn)
eOworld.htm
Gellerman, A. and 7. 9hode. ;+ptionsB 9ethin(ing 'omen and @eadership.< >enter for #ublic @eadership.
+nline at httpBOOwww.(sg.harvard.eduOleadershipO#dfOLiable+ptions.pdf
Glasen, &. ?33?. ;@ow &chooling for Girls, &lower Growth for "llQ >ross)>ountry Evidence on the E,ect of
Gender /ne.uality in Education on Economic 7evelopment.< The World )an& Economic Revie*, Lol.0H,
%o.=, pp. =41M=D=. 'ashingtonB 'orld