Quantitative Methods and
Gender Inequalities
Jacqueline Scott
University of Cambridge
Outline
1. Consider whether early feminist opposition to
2.
3.
4.
5.
quantitative research makes sense
Introduce the ESRC Research Priority Network
on Gender Inequalities (GeNet) as an exemplar
Discuss the diverse methodologies of GeNet
against a ‘fit for purpose’ evaluative framework
Consider challenges posed by understanding
intersectionalities in gender research
Identify how qualitative methods used to inform
and sharpen the ways quantitative researchers
count
Feminism in 1970s /1980s
Emphasis on making women visible in
social sciences and ‘giving voice’
Concern about ‘objectivity’ & ‘impersonal’
knowledge being all too biased
Challenge to essentialist arguments about
‘natural’ differences between men and
women
Championing of qualitative over
quantitative
The difference gender makes
Shift from women to gender
Gender as analytical category – gendered
processes..inclusive of male and females..
Inequalities both between men and
woman and also within men and women
Intersectionalities gender, race, class,
age.. More nuanced understanding
ESRC Gender Equality
Network
Research Priority Network on Gender
Inequalities in Production &
Reproduction
www.genet.ac.uk
Background
Demise of male breadwinner family labour market changes/changes in
parenting partnership
Paradigm shift in gender relations
Greater policy recognition of equality
although policies ambiguous
Some human capital convergence but
inequalities persistent
9 Linked Projects
3 Inter-related themes
Pathways to Adult Attainment & Life Course Processes
Changing occupations and careers of women and men
Biographical agency and developmental outcomes
Gendered pathways from childhood disadvantage to adulthood
Gender, time allocation in paid and unpaid work & the wage gap
Resources, Gender, Ethnic & Class Inequalities
Within-household inequalities in income and power
Gender, ethnicity, migration and service employment
Class & gender, employment and family
Policy Responses to Gender Inequalities
Addressing gender inequality through corporate governance
Policy initiatives tackling inequalities in work and care in UK & EU
3 different methodologies
Pathways to Adult Attainment & Life Course Processes
QUANTITATIVE LONGITUDINAL ANALYSIS - unpacking gendered processes and changes across time
Longitudinal analysis of cohort differences in occupations and careers (Shirley Dex and Heather
Joshi)
Childhood and adolescent transitions to adulthood across cohorts (Ingrid Schoon)
Gendered pathways from childhood disadvantage to adulthood across cohorts (Wendy SigleRuston and John Hobcraft)
Gender, time allocation in paid and unpaid work & the wage gap using the BHPS (Gershuny)
Resources, Gender, Ethnic & Class Inequalities
MIXED METHODS (qualitative unpacking the specific context; quantitative providing estimates of sub-group
differences within the population)
Within-household inequalities in income and power (Himmelweit, Sutherland and Bennett)
Gender, ethnicity, migration and service employment (McDowell)
Class & gender, employment and family (Crompton)
Policy Responses to Gender Inequalities
QUALITATIVE – semi-structured interviewing; documentary analysis
Addressing gender inequality through corporate governance (Deakin)
Policy initiatives tackling inequalities in work and care in UK & EU (Lewis)
Inter-twining of theory, empirical
research and methodology
GeNet has explicit goal of promoting highest
possible methodological standards in its own
gender research and contributing to ESRC’s
various methodological and training initiatives
that are concerned to raise standards of social
science generally
Is there a feminist method? No – what matters
for feminist research is ‘fit for purpose’ and
feminist research is sufficiently broad-ranging
that it spans quantitative and qualitative divides
Questions requiring quantitative analysis
(Source: Joshi and Pacci 1998)
Pay gap narrowing for those aged 26
(enhanced human capital and labour market
experience + Equal Pay Act 1970 & 75)
R a tio o f w o m e n 's to m e n 's w a g e s a t a g e 2 6
1970
0.91
1958
0.84
1946
0.63
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Masculinization of Female Life Course
(UK Cohort effects: Participation- Joshi et al 2005)
Y e a rs b e tw e e n firs t b irth a n d n e x t jo b a t th e m e d ia n
16
14
14
13
12
13
12
y e a rs
10
10
8
9
A ll
8
N o q u a lific a tio n s
H ig h e r q u a lific a tio n s
6
6
5
4
4
2
2
0
0
0
1958
1970
1
1910
1922
1934
1946
m o th e r's ye a r o f b irth
£35,000
Ave r a g e a n n ua l e a r n i n g s
£30,000
£25,000
Ge n d e r gap = 18.5%
M en
W o m en
Ge n d e r gap = 14.9%
£20,000
£15,000
Ge n d e r gap = 10.5%
£10,000
£5,000
£0
First m ain jo b afte r 1995
Earn in gs in 1997/ 98
d e gre e
So u rc e : 7 Yea rs On: a survey of th e ca reer pa th s of 1995 gra dua tes
Earn in gs in 2002/ 03
The combined effects of various factors on the gender difference
in annual earnings of 1995 graduates seven years after graduation
U na d jus t e d g e nd e r
d if f e re nc e
A d jus t e d f o r w e e kly
ho urs
A d jus t e d f o r w e e kly
ho urs a nd s e c t o r
A d jus t e d f o r w e e kly
ho urs , s e c t o rs a nd
w o rkp la c e s e g me nt a t io n
R e s id ua l g e nd e r
d if f e re nc e
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
% d ifference b etween female annual g ro ss earning s and male annual g ro ss earning s
20
Time-use investigation
(Gershuny et al)
Hypothesis: substantial part of gender gap in
wages that persists beyond operation of workplace equal opportunities can be explained in
terms of day-to-day practices of unequal division
of production and caring activities in household.
Data: British Household Panel and Harmonised
European Time Use
Time use by family change:
Women aged 20- 40 (Gershuny 2004)
women aged 20-40
consumption
1140
minutes per day
900
sleep
sleep
sleep
sleep
sleep
sleep
sleep
`
660
other unpaid work
420
housework
paid work
paid work
paid work
paid work
paid work
paid work
paid work
after getting
kid
keeping
partner+kid
180
single
before getting
partner
after getting
partner
keep partner, before getting
no kid
kid
Time use by family change:
Men aged 20-40 (Gershuny 2004)
men aged 20-40
1140
consumption
minutes per day
900
660
other unpaid w ork
420
180
single
before getting
partner
after getting
partner
keep partner, no before getting
kid
kid
after getting kid
keeping
partner+kid
Who does Laundry in Britain by woman's
labour force status? (ISSP)
100
80
% 60
40
20
0
1989 1994 2002 1989 1994 2002 1989 1994 2002
Full-time
usually man
PartTime
usually woman
Out of labour
force
equal
Lagged adaptation
Over the long term women who carry dual
burden have choices – suffer, argue, quit
Not much of real choice – so what happens?
Over time, women and men’s share of domestic
division of labour becomes more equal, with
women reducing unpaid work immediately, but
men’s take up of home chores taking longer and
being less reliable
time on work (mins of day)
neths
UK
USA
Sweden
W Germ
Core domestic work
Male
29
28
33
56
11
Female
188
177
182
143
238
Other unpaid work
Male
84
83
97
117
84
Female
124
111
142
146
132
Male
325
367
406
379
418
Female
94
178
187
262
168
Male
438
478
536
552
513
Female
406
466
511
551
538
Paid work
Total work
Range of models of work-family balance
Model
Description
Adult worker
model
a) Supported
Childcare
Lone parents Work benefits
& low earners Tax credits
b)
Unsupported
Gender
neutral
Nordic gender
Equality
Differentiated adult allowing for
difference
worker
Gender equality
based on female
model
Policies
Male and
female reduced
hours
Countries
Model
encouraged in
EU
UK since 1999
USA
Cash support
for parental
leave; care
relief; parental
leave provision
Sweden & to
lesser extent
other
Scandinavian
Netherlands
Descargar

Quantitative Methods and Gender Inequalities