Is Gender Equity in the Philippines a Puzzle? Response to Nasira Jabeen

chapter 10 Looking through the Leventhal Lens: Is Gender Equity in the Philippines a Puzzle? Response to Nasira Jabeen

Stella Quimbo1

Abstract

Pakistan and the Philippines are populous Asian countries and have similar economic development levels. However, the disparity in the status of women across both countries is substantial. Jabeen (2012) proposes a Gender, Organization and Systems (GOS) model, an application of Leventhal’s concept of equity, to understand the pathways to a fair distribution of outcomes across gender and, specifically, the low levels of participation in governance of Pakistani women. I utilize Jabeen’s analytical framework to discuss the case of Filipino women. In the Philippines, males have few advantages over females in economic participation and opportunities, health and education outcomes and political empowerment. Equitable gender outcomes in the Philippines appear to be mostly driven by informal processes, rather than formal mechanisms. Overall, gender outcomes in the Philippines seem to be fair, not only in distribution but also in procedure.

Introduction

In his 1976 and 1977 papers, Gerald Leventhal made the important point that equity is a multidimensional concept, going beyond the fairness of distribution—the sole focus of traditional equity theory—and including the notion of fairness of procedure. Based on this alternative formulation, “pro- cedural fairness takes into account the social system which generates this distribution and is based on rules, including consistency over time and across persons, accuracy, prevention of bias, ethics and representativeness of all stakeholders” (Jabeen, this volume). In this sense, equity is clearly a richer notion, unpacked in a way that allows a discussion of the various processes

1 Tenth holder of the Prince Claus Chair, 2011–2013.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ��4 | doi ��.��63/9789004269729_��2 Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access Looking through the Leventhal lens 157 influencing it and, ultimately, facilitating the identification of handles avail- able to society’s leaders. Jabeen provides an interesting application of Leventhal’s multidimensional concept of equity to the problem of the lack of gender equity in Pakistan. She proposes a Gender, Organization and Systems (GOS) model to help in the understanding of why women’s participation in the governance of Pakistani remains low. The model traces the various factors within society that explain distributional outcomes. Through the model, she points out that there are sys- temic, organizational and personal factors that contribute to the situation of Pakistani women. The model also helps motivate the need for a two-pronged strategy involving “developing people and [providing an] an enabling environ- ment in institutions” (ibid.). I hope to contribute to Jabeen’s discussion by reflecting on the case of the Philippines, which, according to the 2011 Global Gender Gap Report, has made important strides in closing gender gaps. On the basis of the Global Gender Gap Index, the Philippines is ranked eighth in the world (see Table 10.1), ranked first in Asia and among lower-middle income countries, and the only country in Asia to have closed the gender gaps in health and education. While there still remain gender gaps, particularly in economic participation and opportunity as well as political empowerment, the Philippines has made noteworthy achieve- ments in gender equity despite being resource-poor. This is perhaps the only development indicator for which the Philippines outranks rich nations such as the Netherlands.

Table 10.1 Global Gender Gap Index, selected countries, 2011

Country Overall Economic Educational Health and Political participation attainment survival empowerment and opportunity

Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score

Philippines 8 0.7685 15 0.7632 1 1 1 0.9796 16 0.3314 Netherlands 15 0.747 27 0.7432 32 0.9985 92 0.9697 26 0.2766 Pakistan 133 0.5583 134 0.3446 127 0.7782 123 0.9557 54 0.1547

Source: Global Gender Gap Report (2011)

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access 158 quimbo

Philippines and Pakistan: Some Similarities, Yet Huge Differences in Gender Equity

The Philippines and Pakistan are similar in a number of ways (see Table 10.2). Both are located in Asia and highly populous. While Pakistan’s population is almost double that of the Philippines—173 million versus 93 million—the land area of Pakistan is more than twice as large as that of the Philippines. In terms of gross national income, the sizes of their economies are comparable. Labour productivity levels, as measured by GDP per person employed, are also similar across both countries. However, GDP per capita of the Philippines (3,560 PPP US$) is about 50% larger than that of Pakistan (2,411 PPP US$). Yet, despite the presence of some similarities, both countries differ mark- edly in terms of gender equity, as shown by Table 10.3, which extends Jabeen‘s table by including Philippine data. The differences in gender equity appear to be disproportionately larger than that in income (e.g. a 16-fold difference in gender ranking versus a 50% difference in GDP per capita). The female–male ratios shown in Table 10.3 suggest that it is in the sphere of economic participation and opportunity that the Philippines and Pakistan differ most. Relatively speaking, labour force participation, incomes and opportunities for technical jobs are significantly higher among Filipino women compared with their Pakistani counterparts. On the other hand, similarities are most apparent in the areas of health and political empowerment. Table 10.3 raises the question: how did the Philippines attain relatively good gender gap indices, despite its relatively poor overall economic growth

Table 10.2 Basic economic indicators, Philippines and Pakistan, 2011

Variable Description Pakistan Philippines

Land area sq. km. 770,880 298,170 Population Total 173,593,383 93,260,798 Population density People per sq. km. of 225 313 land area GDP per capita PPP, constant 2005 2,411 3,560 international $ GDP per person employed PPP, constant 1990 $ 8,525 8,354 Gross national income constant 2000 US $ 120,153,556,306 129,216,102,020

Source: World Bank Data Bank.

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access Looking through the Leventhal lens 159

Table 10.3 Gender Gap Sub-indexes, the Philippines and Pakistan, 2011

Gender Gap Sub-indexes Philippines Pakistan Phil- Pakistan ratio

Female Male F–M Female Male F–M F–M ratio ratio ratio

Economic participation and opportunity Labour force participation 51 80 0.64 22 88 0.25 2.55 Income (PPP US $) 2642 4429 0.60 977 3402 0.29 2.08 Legislators, senior officials, managers 55% 45% 1.22 3% 97% 0.03 39.52 Professional and technical workers 62% 38% 1.63 22% 78% 0.28 5.78 Educational attainment Literacy Rate 96 95 1.01 40 69 0.58 1.74 Enrolment in primary education 93 91 1.02 60 72 0.83 1.23 Enrolment in secondary education 66 55 1.20 29 36 0.81 1.49 Enrolment in tertiary education 32 26 1.23 5 6 0.83 1.48 Health and survival Healthy Life Expectancy 64 59 1.08 55 56 0.98 1.10 Political empowerment Members of Parliament 22% 78% 0.28 22% 78% 0.28 1.00 Ministerial positions 14% 86% 0.16 8% 93% 0.09 1.89 Years with female Head of State 16 34 0.47 5 45 0.11 4.24 (last 50 years)

Source: Global Gender Gap Report (2011) performance in recent decades? To begin with, should we really expect a positive correlation between gender equity and income levels? There are at least two reasons for expecting this correlation. One is the fertility channel (Galor & Weil 1996): reduced gender wage inequality implies higher wages for women, higher costs of raising children, reduced fertility and, ultimately, faster economic growth through increased female labour force participation. Another is the human capital channel: an economy with more educated women grows faster because this will secure increased human capital of children (Hill & King 1995). Indeed, Figure 10.1 shows a positive correlation between income

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access 160 quimbo

120000

Luxemburg 100000

Norway 80000

Switzerland 60000 Australia Denmark Japan Sweden Finland 40000 UAE Germany Iceland Spain Korea, Rep. 2010 GDP per capita (current US$) 20000 Saudi Arabia Trinidad and Tobago South Africa Yemen Pakistan 0 Philippines 0,4000 0,4500 0,5000 0,5500 0,6000 0,6500 0,7000 0,7500 0,8000 0,8500 0,9000 Global Gender Gap Index 2010 score Figure 10.1 The Global Gender Gap and GDP per capita, 2010 Data Source for GDP per capita: Data Bank, World Bank.2 Data Source for GGG: The Global Gender Gap Report 2010.3

and gender equity (p<0.001), but with the Philippines being a clear outlier. Pakistan and the Philippines are relatively similar in terms of GDP per capita, as indicated by their relative position in Figure 10.1, yet the latter has achieved a gender gap comparable to Germany and Denmark. To better understand gender equity in the Philippines, we draw insights from the Leventhal concept of equity, which goes beyond the final distribution of rewards or outcomes and requires an understanding of the procedures that generated the distribution of outcomes. Jabeen’s GOS model of gender governance provides a useful framework for identifying pathways to a fair distribution of outcomes across gender.

Understanding the Philippine Case

Early studies (Smedley 1931; Keesing 1937; Macaraig et al. 1954; Fox 1963; Alvarez & Alvarez 1973) on the role of women in Philippine society hint at

2 http://databank.worldbank.org/data/home.aspx [accessed 6 July 2012]. 3 www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GenderGap_Report_2010.pdf [accessed 6 July 2012].

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access Looking through the Leventhal lens 161 multiple procedures at work. An important formal mechanism that promotes gender equity is the National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women, which utilizes a gender-mainstreaming strategy and other tools such as development plans for women, culture change in the bureaucracy, high-level champions and gender-sensitizing training. It appears that the commission’s approach focuses on changing behaviour and ways of thinking rather than on sanctions that typically accompany formal mechanisms, such as quotas for women in employment and politics, as in the case of Pakistan. Jabeen points out that such quotas violate merit and tend not to be a sustainable means of promoting women’s participation in governance. In Philippine society, there are also informal mechanisms promoting gender equity, mostly within the confines of the household. For example, the system of inheritance in rural areas reinforces and/or reflects how gender equity is achieved. Estudillo et al. (2001) found that gender inequities resulting from land inheritance in favour of sons are neutralized through larger investments in daughters’ schooling. In addition, they found no “strong evidence that daughters and wives are particularly less favoured in expenditure allocation compared to sons and husbands”. They concluded that, on the whole, “the Philippines emerges as relatively equitable”. An alternative explanation for why households may invest more in daughters’ education is that a college degree is a way of improving marriage mar- ket outcomes. Filipino parents who want to increase their daughters’ chances of “marrying up” and then indirectly benefiting through intergenerational transfers after marriage will have the incentive to invest in their daughters’ education. Participation in economic decision making within households is also an informal mechanism for promoting gender equity. Using data from the National Demographic and Health Survey, we find that the majority of Filipino women make decisions on everyday purchases, a trend that has been improving over time (see Figure 10.2). Early on, Filipino women had already established them- selves as keepers of the purse, with husbands handing over earnings to their spouses to make the necessary household purchases (Smedley 1931; Keesing 1937; Macaraig et al. 1954; Fox 1963; Alvarez & Alvarez 1973). Nevertheless, some inequities remain. The decision to make large purchases (e.g. consumer durables and real property) continues to be the domain of men and only a fifth of Filipino women (see Figure 10.3). Multivariate statis- tical analysis shows that the likelihood that a woman decides on large purchases increases when the woman is working, or with fewer years of schooling for the man, or with the number of years that the couple has been together.

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access 162 quimbo 70

40 2003 2008 30

0 Poorest Poor Middle Richer Richest Figure 10.2 Proportion of Filipino women who decide on everyday purchases, by wealth quintile,* 2003 and 2008 (%) * Wealth quintiles are computed by the National Statistics Office on the basis of household assets. Source: Author’s computations using the NDHS (2003 and 2008).

These suggest that there are informal ways or voluntary actions chosen by a household that will result in improved gender equity. Although there is a dearth of rigorous studies on pathways to gender equity in the Philippines, it would appear that household dynamics play an important role, whether through parental decisions on bequeathals, marriages or purchases. Are these procedures fair? From the point of view of the children, issues of fairness will perhaps be rare, given that the household as a decision- making unit is monolithic, akin to a one-party system of government. As Leventhal (1977: 40–41) pointed out:

[W]hen leaders consistently endorse and legitimize certain rules, fairness will be defined in terms of these rules. More importantly, after a time, existing procedures and distributions are likely to be taken for granted. The fairness of existing arrangements may no longer be evalu- ated. . . . For example, consider a family in which parents impose a stable and consistent set of rules. Their view of fairness will prevail and children will believe the existing procedures and distributions are fair, even though from an external observer’s viewpoint, one child may have more advantages than another.

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access Looking through the Leventhal lens 163 30

2003 15 2008

0 Poorest Poor Middle Richer Richest Figure 10.3 Proportion of Filipino women who decide on large purchases, by wealth quintile,* 2003 and 2008 (%) * Wealth quintiles are computed by the National Statistics Office on the basis of household assets. Source: Author’s computations using the NDHS (2003 and 2008).

Religion is arguably an important basis for procedures and notions of fairness in any society. Dollar & Gatti (1999: 22) pointed out that religion is a significant predictor of gender inequality, suggesting that some societies “have a prefer- ence for inequality and are willing to pay the price for it”. In their own cross- country analysis of gender differences in health and education outcomes, they found that “affiliations to Muslim and Hindu religions are consistently associated with high gender inequality, whereas the Protestant religion and high civil liberties are associated with low inequality” (ibid.). In understanding the differences in gender inequality in Pakistan and the Philippines, it is worth noting that while Islam is the state religion in Pakistan, Christianity is the dominant religion in the Philippines. There is, however, a small group of Filipinos who practise Islam, particularly in the southern islands of Mindanao. In the NDHS samples, which are representative at the sub-national level, the proportion of respondents who are Muslims is about 7%. Multivariate logistic regressions using the 2003 and 2008 NDHS suggest that religion is a significant predictor of the likelihood of women deciding on daily needs and large purchases (see Figure 10.4). Compared with Muslim women, their Catholic counterparts appear to have greater participation in economic decision making at home. The magnitude of the predicted differences,

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access 164 quimbo however, is not large, particularly for the likelihood of women making decisions on large purchases.

Gender Equity as a Means, Not the End

In Jabeen’s (2012) words, “gender equity should not be seen merely as a social imperative but also as an economic need for developing and using human capital for promoting sustainable good governance in a country”. If Filipino boys and girls are relatively equal in status, particularly in health and education outcomes, why does the country remain economically under-developed? To what extent does gender equity in the Philippines feed into economic development? Did the fertility and human capital channels fail to reap the benefits of gender equity in the form of higher incomes? Are there factors that act as obstacles to the gender equity pathway to economic growth? Are these factors beyond the realm of gender equity—for example, poor quality of education and health services? These are empirical questions that need to be investigated with more data and thorough analysis. Although Buvinic et al. (2009: 354) point out that there have been “studies in a range of settings indicating that expanding women’s education and control over household resources is associated with better child health and education”, the unique Philippine situation needs to be studied more intensively. 70

50 Female decides on daily 40 needs

30 Female decides on large purchases 20

0 Catholic Islam Others

Figure 10.4 Proportion of Filipino women who decide on daily needs and large purchases, by religion, 2003 and 2008 (%) Source: Author’s computations using the NDHS of 2003 and 2008.

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access Looking through the Leventhal lens 165

As a last note, one also needs to keep in mind that gender gaps are indepen- dent of levels of outcomes. Gaps may be completely closed but at very low levels of outcomes, possibly at levels that cannot fuel economic growth.

Conclusion

The sex of a child is a random draw, and thus, from a purely biological point of view, there should be no a priori justification for favouring one over another. Societies, because of their histories, cultures and politico-economic systems, evolve over time in a way that may favour one gender. But there is good reason to believe that gender inequities are not good for economic development over the long run. A framework for understanding gender inequities is thus important for making choices on appropriate ways for policy makers to intervene. Jabeen’s application of Leventhal’s concepts to gender equity is thus an important contribution. She illustrates very well the limitations of traditional, one-dimensional equity theory, which defines fairness as a situation where “rewards are in proportion to contributions”. This notion is arguably more appropriate for private goods, which have a price and whose consumption is exclusive to individuals who are willing and able to pay this price. Upper- income-class families might utilize private education more, a situation which could be “fair” based on equity theory since they contribute more in terms of total fees paid. For public goods, however, less utilization by poorer families because they have lower contributions (say, through general taxes) will gen- erally not constitute a “fair outcome” in most societies. As gender equity is typically measured in terms of access to goods and services (e.g. health and education) that are provided by both public and private sectors, equity theory would offer limited usefulness in explaining variations across countries like the Philippines and Pakistan. On the whole, there are fair gender outcomes in the Philippines, with males having few or no advantages over females in economic participation and opportunities, health and education outcomes, as well as in political empowerment. The procedures leading to these equitable outcomes appear to be mostly informal, within households, involving decisions made mostly by parents and with a strong likelihood of being perceived as fair by the children. Thus, gender outcomes seem to be fair not only in distribution but also in procedure. But having secured an acceptable level of gender equity, the question of whether procedures leading to fair outcomes are also fair would perhaps be less important than the following: which of the multiple procedures, ranging from formal to informal, best explains the resulting distribution of outcomes?

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access 166 quimbo

Looking at the Philippine gender equity puzzle through the Leventhal lens, I propose the following hypothesis for future researchers to test: seemingly fair procedures result in fair gender outcomes, but there are structural barriers for fair outcomes to translate into higher incomes and sustained economic development. Solving this puzzle provides a platform for sustained and meaningful gender equity.

References

Alvarez, B.C. & P.M. Alvarez (1973), The family-owned business: A matriarchal model. Philippine Studies 20: 547–561. Buvinic, M., M. Gupta & U. Casabbone (2009), Gender, poverty, and demography: An overview. The World Bank Economic Review 2009: 1–23. Dollar, D. & R. Gatti (1999), Gender inequality, income, and growth: Are good times good for women? Washington DC: World Bank, The World Bank Development Research Group, Policy Research Report on Gender and Development, Working Paper Series, No. 1. Estudillo J., A. Quisumbing & K. Otsuka (2001), Gender differences in land inheritance, schooling and lifetime income: Evidence from the rural Philippines. Journal of Development Studies 37(4): 23–48. Fox, R. (1963), Men and women in the Philippines. In: B.E. Ward, ed., Women in the new Asia. Amsterdam: Unesco, pp. 342–364. Galor, O. & D.N. Weil (1996), The gender gap, fertility, and growth. The American Review 86(3): 374–387. Global Gender Gap Report (2011). World Economic Forum. Hill, M.A. & E. King (1995), Women’s education and economic well-being. Feminist Economics 1(2). Jabeen, N. (2014), Gender equity and governance in Pakistan: Looking through Leventhal’s concept of organizational justice. This volume. Keesing, F.M. (1937), The Philippines: A nation in the making. Shanghai: Kelly Walsh. Macaraig, S., S. Espiritu & V. Bernardino (1954), The development and the problems of the Filipino family. Philippine social life. Manila: Macaraig Publishing Co. Leventhal, G. (1976), The distribution of rewards and resources in groups and organiza- tions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 9: 91–131. ——— (1977), What should be done with equity theory? New approaches to the study of fairness in social relationships. In: K. Gergen, M. Greenberg & R. Willis, eds, Social exchange. Advances in theory and research. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 27–55. Smedley, A. (1931), The women in the Philippines. The Modern Review 44: 456–461. World Bank Data Bank, http://databank.worldbank.org/data/home.aspx [accessed 28 September 2012].

Stella Quimbo - 9789004269729 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 10:41:28PM via free access