Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1 Associate Professor in Economics, Department of Economics, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
2 Master’s degree in Economics, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.
3 PhD Student of Economics, Department of Economics, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.
4 Assistant professor of economics, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran.
Abstract
Introduction
In today’s world, the socio-economic positions of women and men have changed; but impacts of masculine ideologies are still observed, especially in underdeveloped and developing countries. There are a lot of discussion about how gender has affected human life. An important question is that since most of the politicians throughout history have been men, have the laws and consequently the societies been formed as framework for benefit of men? Are political and economic structures a reproduction of the same patriarchal view?
Many believes that the existence of opportunities inequality is historically and institutionally related to the role of governments as a shield that protects the men. Hence women and men have not had the same “opportunity” and “freedom of choice”. In other words, regardless of whether the male perspective shaped the political-economic structures or not, there is a consensus that the opportunity and freedom of choice has been different for men and women. Therefore, it cannot be claimed that what has been institutionalized and experienced as custom and habit throughout history is a natural routine; even if one could be sure or prove that the result of equal opportunity for women would not be different from what it is now.
Methodology
For this reason, the present paper has investigated the role of political structure and power in gender inequalities using more than 2500 observations (94 countries during the period of 1970-2020). For this purpose, political rights and civil liberties indicators as well as Hofstede’s six cultural dimensions have been used. The political freedom index was collected from Freedom House, which has two sub-indices of political rights and civil liberties. Hofstede’s index has six key dimensions including long term orientation (vs. short term orientation), individualism (vs. collectivism), uncertainty avoidance, power distance, masculinity (vs. femininity), and indulgence (vs. restraint). The gender development index is calculated based on the ratio of the human development index of women to men. Therefore, this index reflects the status of women compared to men in the three sub-indices of health, education and per capita income. Another indicator is gender inequality, which shows the status of women in terms of reproductive health (maternal mortality and adolescent fertility), empowerment (parliamentary representation and education attainment) and the labor market (labor force participation).
To analyze this large sample of data, two methods of analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Random Forest are used. In this way, it is investigated whether the factor of political freedom played a role in explaining gender inequality or not? In other words, does the difference in the level of political freedom explain the difference in the of gender inequality indices or not?
Results
Based on the analysis of variance, two dimensions of democratic political structure (political rights and civil liberties) have a very important role in gender development and gender inequality of countries. The democratic system is a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition, for achieving fairness in the distribution of economic and social opportunities between women and men. The lowest gender inequality is specific to the countries that were in the best situation in terms of political and cultural factors (Iceland, Belgium, Denmark, Switzerland, Finland and Norway). But India and Bangladesh, which experienced high gender inequality, were not the worst in terms of political rights and civil liberties. Also there were a few countries with low gender inequality and low civil and political freedoms (Belarus, Russia, Venezuela, and Vietnam).
Hence, it can be claimed that the highest inequality did not happen in a democratic political system and the lowest inequality were most likely in democratic systems. In addition, the main difference between not-free and partly-free countries with free countries. Then it is not possible to help significantly improve the situation by arbitrary choices or discretion. Policymakers in developing and underdeveloped countries are not faced with a policy trade-off between gender freedom and development, but rather an all-or-nothing choice.
The findings of the random forest also confirmed that among the investigated characteristics, emphasis on civil liberties and political rights is essential in order to enjoy a society with limited gender discrimination. Among Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, dimensions such as power distance and indulgence had a more stable role; but uncertainty avoidance was the least important factor among the set of existing factors. However, the results related to the role and importance of cultural dimensions are very fragile and will change depending on the sample or gender index. Therefore, society and policy-makers should not fall into the trap of cultural justification of gender discrimination.
Conclusion
Based on the results above, reducing gender inequalities and trying to eliminate discrimination according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is in line with the political reform in the developing and underdeveloped countries. Policymakers in developing and underdeveloped countries are not faced with a policy trade-off between gender freedom and development, but rather an all-or-nothing choice. In other words, in a not-free political system, a significant improvement in the reduction of gender inequalities cannot be expected, just as in a free political system, a separate activity in the field of women’s fair benefit is not required as a mandate.
Striving for a free political system by reducing gender inequality and improving human development are two sides of the same coin. It should be noted that eliminating discrimination and reducing gender inequalities is valuable in itself. Freedom is the most valuable goal after survival, and one of the basic concerns in development is this freedom. In addition, elimination of discrimination is also useful from an instrumental view. Women’s opportunities to use their capabilities outside the family have increased and hence the society benefit from the other half of its talents. Finally, reducing gender inequalities through the political system has a collective function that respects women’s identity because a sense of identity is a source of strength and trust.
The alignment of democracy with efforts to eliminate gender discrimination is inevitable. These two issues are two sides of the same coin, and the realization of a free political system will mean the necessary platform for reducing gender inequality and improving human development. Therefore, intellectual activities as well as civil and political efforts are expected to rely on this point of commonality instead of distinguishing and highlighting feminist literature and leftist views. Striving for different dimensions of political freedom will automatically lead to the reduction of discriminations and related policies both in terms of tools, in terms of identity, and in terms of political power and freedom in life decisions.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)