DOCSLIB.ORG

Topic Report Horizontal and Vertical Segregation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Topic Report Horizontal and Vertical Segregation Meta-analysis of gender and science research Topic report Horizontal and vertical segregation Draft version – Not to be quoted without authors’ permission September 2010 Danièle Meulders Robert Plasman Audrey Rigo Síle O’Dorchai Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) – Département d’économie appliquée (DULBEA) 1 Table of contents LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................................6 LIST OF BOXES............................................................................................................................7 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................8 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................8 1. CONCEPTS AND METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................9 1.1. General definition....................................................................................................................9 1.2. Explanatory theories.............................................................................................................10 1.2.1. Neoclassical theories........................................................................................................10 1.2.1.1. Human capital theory ................................................................................................10 1.2.1.2. The theory of intentional and statistical discrimination............................................11 1.2.1.3. The “job competition model”....................................................................................12 1.2.2. Institutional theories.......................................................................................................12 1.2.2.1. The theory of the segmented labour market..............................................................12 1.2.2.2. Theories based on organisational and technological mutations................................13 1.2.3. Radical and gender theories ...........................................................................................14 1.3. Measures and indicators.......................................................................................................16 1.4. Results of European comparisons........................................................................................20 2.1. Horizontal segregation..........................................................................................................27 2.1.1. Women employed in research ..........................................................................................27 2.1.2. Women employed in research across fields of science....................................................32 2.1.3. Segregation in higher education.......................................................................................38 2.1.4. Segregation in education: fields of science ......................................................................40 2.2. Vertical segregation...............................................................................................................43 3. Gender segregation in the Gender and Science Data Base...................................................51 3.1. Synthesis and statistical analysis of the Gender and Science DataBase...........................51 3.1.1. General overview .............................................................................................................51 3.1.2. Institutional sector............................................................................................................53 3.1.3. Scientific field of study ....................................................................................................53 3.1.4. Life course stage...............................................................................................................54 3.1.5. Methodological approach.................................................................................................54 2 3.1.6. Sub-topics of horizontal and vertical segregation ............................................................57 3.1.7. Evolution of the number of publications between 1980 and 2009...................................57 3.1.8. Horizontal and vertical segregation by country group .....................................................58 3.2. Research questions ................................................................................................................63 3.2.1. Horizontal segregation .....................................................................................................63 3.2.1.1. Educational segregation ............................................................................................63 3.2.1.2. Occupational segregation ..........................................................................................64 3.2.2. Vertical segregation..........................................................................................................66 3.2.2.1. Academia...................................................................................................................67 3.2.2.2. Other/all sectors.........................................................................................................68 3.3. Methodology ..........................................................................................................................69 3.4. Results ....................................................................................................................................76 3.4.1. Horizontal segregation .....................................................................................................76 3.4.1.1. Education...................................................................................................................76 3.4.1.2. Labour market ...........................................................................................................88 3.4.2. Vertical segregation........................................................................................................100 3.4.2.1. Higher education .....................................................................................................100 3.4.2.2. General – Public and private sectors.......................................................................113 4. STATISTICAL GAPS AND RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................120 4.1. Statistical gaps .....................................................................................................................120 4.2. Recommendations ...............................................................................................................123 5. CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................................127 6. REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................130 3 List of Figures LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................................................6 FIGURE 1: GENDER OCCUPATIONAL SEGREGATION IN THE EU, 1992–2007 ....................................20 FIGURE 2: GENDER OCCUPATIONAL SEGREGATION IN EUROPE, 2007..............................................21 FIGURE 3: GENDER SECTORAL SEGREGATION IN EUROPE, 2007 ......................................................21 FIGURE 4: HORIZONTAL, VERTICAL AND OVERALL SEGREGATION IN EUROPE, 2006 .......................22 FIGURE 5: PROPORTION OF WOMEN IN THE EU-27 FOR TOTAL EMPLOYMENT, TERTIARY EDUCATED AND EMPLOYED (HRSTC) AND SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS IN 2007, COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH RATE FOR WOMEN AND MEN 2002-2007 ...................................................................28 FIGURE 6: PROPORTION OF FEMALE RESEARCHERS, 2006...............................................................29 FIGURE 7: PROPORTION OF FEMALE RESEARCHERS BY SECTOR, 2006..............................................30 FIGURE 8: PERCENTAGE OF RESEARCHERS WHO ARE WOMEN BY SECTOR IN EU MEMBER STATES, HC, 2000.................................................................................................................................32 FIGURE 9: DISTRIBUTION OF RESEARCHERS IN THE HIGHER EDUCATION SECTOR (HES) ACROSS FIELDS OF SCIENCE, 2006.........................................................................................................33 FIGURE 10: DISTRIBUTION OF RESEARCHERS IN THE GOVERNMENT SECTOR (GOV) ACROSS FIELDS OF SCIENCE, 2006 ....................................................................................................................34 FIGURE 11: DISTRIBUTION OF RESEARCHERS ACROSS ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES (NACE) IN THE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE SECTOR (BES), 2006 ..........................................................................35 FIGURE 12: PROPORTION OF FEMALE PHD (ISCED 6) GRADUATES, 2006.......................................38 FIGURE 13: COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH RATE OF PHD (ISCED 6) GRADUATES BY SEX, 1998- 2001 AND 2002-2006 ..............................................................................................................39 FIGURE 14: PROPORTIONS OF MEN AND WOMEN IN A TYPICAL
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Download File 080718-WP-Intersectionality-Labor-Market
    Washington Center 1500 K Street NW, Suite 850 for Equitable Growth Washington, DC 20005 Working paper series Returns in the labor market: A nuanced view of penalties at the intersection of race and gender Mark Paul Khaing Zaw Darrick Hamilton William Darity Jr. July 2018 https://equitablegrowth.org/working-papers/intersectionality-labor-market/ © 2018 by Mark Paul, Khaing Zaw, Darrick Hamilton, and William Darity Jr. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Returns in the Labor Market: A Nuanced View of Penalties at the Intersection of Race and Gender July 2018 Mark Paul,1 Khaing Zaw,2 Darrick Hamilton,3 and William Darity Jr.4 Abstract There have been decades of research on wage gaps for groups based on their socially salient identities such as race and gender, but little empirical investigation on the effects of holding multiple identities. Using the Current Population Survey, we provide new evidence on intersectionality and the wage gap. This paper makes two important contributions. First, we find that there is no single “gender” or “race” wage penalty. Second, we present evidence that holding multiple identities cannot readily be disaggregated in an additive fashion. Instead, the penalties associated with the combination of two or more socially marginalized identities interact in multiplicative or quantitatively nuanced ways. JEL Codes: J15, J16, J31, J71, Z13 Acknowledgements: This study was made possible with the generous support of the Nathan Cummings Foundation. 1 Mark Paul is an Assistant Professor at New College of Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Ideas and the Social Construction of Organizations
    Management Ideas and the Social Construction of Organizations cultural foundations include scientization, individual rights and capacities, and ongoing individual education and professionalization. The processes identified are illustrated with examples of particular management ideas that have contributed to the standardization of organizations as a single, meta-form of social structure. The chapter ends by discussing research implications and future scholarly directions." > Oxford Handbooks Online Management Ideas and the Social Construction of Organizations Shawn Pope and Patricia Bromley The Oxford Handbook of Management Ideas Edited by Andrew Sturdy, Stefan Huesinkveld, Trish Reay, and David Strang Print Publication Date: Mar 2019 Subject: Business and Management, Organizational Theory and Behaviour Online Publication Date: Apr 2019 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198794219.013.28 Abstract and Keywords This chapter examines cultural transformations that have contributed to the expansion of management ideas in number, domains, and across sectors. The discussion is organized around a conceptual model that depicts propositions arguing that cultural foundations underpin the expansion of management ideas and formal organization as core elements of contemporary society. These Page pageId="12"?>cultural foundations include scientization, individual rights and capacities, and ongoing individual education and professionalization. The processes identified are illustrated with examples of particular management ideas that have contributed to the standardization
    [Show full text]
  • Taking Stock: Data and Evidence on Gender Equality in Digital Access, Skills and Leadership
    An EQUALS product coordinated by: 2018 Taking stock: Data and evidence on gender equality in digital access, skills and leadership Preliminary fi ndings of a review by the EQUALS Research Group Research Access Skills Leadership http://www.equals.org ISBN: 978-92-61-27861-8 (paper version) 978-92-61-27871-7 (electronic version) 978-92-61-27881-6 (eBook version) 978-92-61-27891-5 (mobile version) ii Preliminary findings of a review by the EQUALS Research Group CONTENTS FOREWORD����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������v Introduction ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������v Key Findings ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������v PART 1�������.......����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������2 1. Gender Equality in ICT Access ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������2 2. Gender Equality in ICT Skills ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������8 3. Gender Equality in ICT Leadership ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������13 4. The Dark Side �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������17
    [Show full text]
  • Gender-Based Occupational Segregation in the 1990'S
    InFocus Programme on Promoting the Declaration on Fundamental Principles WORK IN FREEDOM and Rights at Work International Labour Office Gender-based occupational segregation in the 1990’s R. Anker, H. Melkas and A. Korten DECLARATION/WP/16/2003 Working Paper Working WP.16 Working Paper Gender-based occupational segregation in the 1990s by Richard Anker Independent consultant, Geneva, Switzerland Helinä Melkas Research at Helsinki University of Technology Lahti Center, Finland and Ailsa Korten Independent consultant, Canberra, Australia International Labour Office September 2003 Foreword In June 1998 the International Labour Conference adopted the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up. The Declaration obligates all member States of the International Labour Organization to respect, promote and realize freedom of association and effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining, the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour, the effective abolition of child labour, and the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation1. The InFocus Programme on Promoting the Declaration is responsible for the reporting processes and technical cooperation activities associated with the Declaration Follow-up; and it carries out awareness-raising, advocacy and knowledge functions – of which this Working Paper is an example. Working Papers are intended to stimulate discussion of the issues covered by the Declaration. They express the views of the authors, which are not necessarily those of the ILO. The importance of occupational sex segregation as a form of discrimination is recognised in ILO Convention on Discrimination (Employment and Occupation), 1958 (No. 111). It is one of the most insidious aspects of gender inequality in the labour market, since it is generally accompanied by lower pay and worse working conditions in female occupations.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender; Labour; Economic Empowerment; Employment; Discrimination
    Gender Based Occupational Segregation and Economic Empowerment of Women in Sri Lanka M. G. H. Harshani and A. S. P. Abhayaratne Department of Economics and Statistics University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka Keywords : Gender; Labour; Economic empowerment; Employment; Discrimination. Introduction Women’s economic empowerment is the capacity of women to participate and benefit in growth process of an economy. The economic empowerment recognizes the women’s contributions in employment and value of respects and their dignity. Sri Lankan women have achieved a relatively higher status in terms of civil rights, education, employment etc., when compared with women in other developing countries. However, the Sri Lankan women have not fully achieved equal rights and gender equality according to international norms in all aspects including employment (Centre for Women’s Research, 2011). Although, Sri Lankan government had the commitment to ensure gender equality and recognizes women’s right since ratifying the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women in 1981, women experienced discrimination in their career lives. While the state provides equal employment opportunities in the public sector employment, there is a wide discrepancy in the law and the reality. Alam (2014) indicates that educated female can perform a significant role in their family economy by having an employment. They also receive better status and power in the family as well as in the society 89 due to financial gains. According to West (2006), working status is important to empower women economically and the employed women also have greater likelihood for higher empowerment in other aspects than those women do not employed.
    [Show full text]
  • Barriers to Women's Employment and the Extent
    BARRIERS TO WOMEN’S EMPLOYMENT AND THE EXTENT OF GENDER INEQUALITY IN THE LABOUR MARKET IN TURKEY Çiğdem Gedikli A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of East Anglia Norwich Business School SEPTEMBER 2015 This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that use of any information derived there from must be in accordance with current UK Copyright Law. In addition, any quotation or extract must include full attribution. i ABSTRACT This thesis investigates gender inequalities in employment outcomes in Turkey in the context of low employment rates of women, occupational gender segregation and gender wage differentials. The first empirical chapter of the thesis sheds light on the role of traditional or conservative social norms and culture on women’s employment in Turkey based on the data for the years 1998 and 2008. It provides evidence that traditional and conservative values, increasingly, reduce women’s likelihood of waged employment and they are also associated with an increased probability of women being in the informal segment of the labour market, either as unpaid family workers or informal waged workers. The second substantive chapter of the thesis points to the extent of occupational gender segregation in Turkey. It shows that women are more likely to be employed in lower-paid jobs and in lower ranked occupations, whereas men remain at an advantaged position both in terms of pay levels or the positions of the occupations they hold in the social hierarchy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Joint Effect of Ethnicity and Gender on Occupational Segregation
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Universidad Carlos III de Madrid e-Archivo Working Paper 11-40 Departamento de Economía Economic Series (48) Universidad Carlos III de Madrid May 2013 Calle Madrid, 126 28903 Getafe (Spain) Fax (34) 916249875 The joint effect of ethnicity and gender on occupational segregation. An approach based on the Mutual Information Index§ Daniel Guinea-Martín, Ricardo Mora, and Javier Ruiz-Castillo1 Abstract This article studies the effects of gender and ethnicity on occupational segregation. The traditional approach to this topic measures the two sources of segregation separately. In contrast, we measure the joint effect of gender and ethnicity by applying a multigroup segregation index–the Mutual Information or M index–to the product of the two genders and seven ethnic groups distinguished in our census data for England and Wales in 2001. We exploit M's strong group decomposability property to consistently pose the following two questions: (i) How much does each source contribute to occupational segregation, controlling for the effect of the other? (ii) Is the combined impact of gender and ethnicity greater than, equal to, or smaller than the sum of their individual effects? The main empirical findings are the following two. First, we confirm previous results showing the greater importance of gender over ethnicity as a source of occupational segregation. However, we find that ethnicity contributes 13.5 percent of overall segregation in geographical areas where minorities concentrate. Second, contrary to intersectionality theories, we find that there is a small, “dwindling” interaction effect between the two sources of segregation: ethnicity slightly weakens the segregative power of gender, and vice versa.
    [Show full text]
  • Occupational Segregation and Earnings Differences By
    Research Summaries Occupational segregation factors such as workers' ages, education, and occupa- tional skill or status .' and earnings differences by sex Data and method NANCY F. RYTINA The data for this research are cross-tabulations from the 1976 Survey of Income and Education, which is be- The persistence of a wide male-female earnings dif- ing used as part of a continuing study on occupational ferential is well-documented . Through 1978, women sex segregation . The median 1975 annual earnings of listed who worked full time continued to earn about 60 per- men and women in all detailed occupations were cent as much as men .' Among the various explanations for workers grouped by age, race, and level of education offered to account for these differences, one suggested as approximate indicators of worker characteristics . The by a growing body of literature is that occupational sex percentage of women in each of the occupations was segregation plays a critical role.' The majority of work- calculated as a measure of occupational sex segregation . ing women are employed in a small number of occupa- In addition, the job characteristic of occupational status earnings tions which are predominantly female ; in both 1969 and is included to take into account variations in 1979, about one-half of all working women were between male and female occupations which arise from employed in fewer than 30 of the detailed Census occu- the concentration of female occupations in the middle are more dis- pations (in which 80 percent or more of the employees of the status hierarchy . Male occupations oc- were women) .3 Among the occupations heavily dominat- persed ; they include the highest paying professional ed by women are nurses, secretaries, and elementary cupations, as well as some of the very low paid service Socio-Economic school teachers .
    [Show full text]
  • Industrialization and Dominant- Minority Relations: from Slavery to Segregation and the Coming of Postindustrial Society
    4 ❖ Industrialization and Dominant- Minority Relations: From Slavery to Segregation and the Coming of Postindustrial Society A war sets up in our emotions: one part of our feelings tells us it is good to be in the city, that we have a chance at life here, that we need but turn a corner to become a stranger, that we need no longer bow and dodge at the sight of the Lords of the Land. Another part of our feelings tells us that, in terms of worry and strain, the cost of living in the kitchenettes is too high, that the city heaps too much responsibility on us and gives too little security in return. The kitchenette, with its filth and foul air, with its one toilet for thirty or more tenants, kills our black babies so fast that in many cities twice as many of them die as white babies. The kitchenette scatters death so widely among us that our death rate exceeds our birth rate, and if it were not for the trains and autos bringing us daily into the city from the plantations, we black folk who dwell in northern cities would die out entirely over the course of a few years. The kitchenette throws desperate and unhappy people into an unbearable closeness of association, thereby increasing latent friction, giving birth to never-ending quarrels of recrimination, accusation, and vindictiveness, producing warped personalities. 130 Chapter 4 Industrialization and Dominant-Minority Relations ❖ 131 The kitchenette injects pressure and tension into our individual personalities, making many of us give up the struggle, walk off and leave wives, husbands, and even children behind to shift for themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Unequal, Unfair, Ineffective and Inefficient Gender Inequity in Health: Why It Exists and How We Can Change It Women and Gender
    Unequal, Unfair, Ineffective and Inefficient Gender Inequity in Health: Why it exists and how we can change it Final Report to the WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health September 2007 Women and Gender Equity Knowledge Network Submitted by Gita Sen and Piroska Östlin Co-coordinators of the WGEKN1 Report writing team Gita Sen, Piroska Östlin, Asha George 1 We are very grateful to the members and corresponding members of the WGEKN, and the authors of background papers for their willingness to write, read, comment and send material. Special thanks are due to Linda Rydberg and Priya Patel for their cheerful and competent support at the different stages of this report. We would also like to thank Beena Varghese for her inputs to the report. Members Rebecca Cook Rosalind Petchesky Claudia Garcia Moreno Silvina Ramos Adrienne Germain Sundari Ravindran Veloshnee Govender Alex Scott-Samuel Caren Grown Gita Sen (Coordinator) Afua Hesse Hilary Standing Helen Keleher Debora Tajer Yunguo LIU Sally Theobald Piroska Östlin (Coordinator) Huda Zurayk Corresponding members Pat Armstrong Jennifer Klot Jill Astbury Gunilla Krantz Gary Barker Rally Macintyre Anjana Bhushan Peggy Maguire Mabel Bianco Mary Manandhar Mary Anne Burke Nomafrench Mbombo James Dwyer Geeta Rao Gupta Margrit Eichler Sunanda Ray Sahar El- Sheneity Marta Rondon Alessandra Fantini Hania Sholkamy Elsa Gómez Erna Surjadi Ana Cristina González Vélez Wilfreda Thurston Anne Hammarström Joanna Vogel Amparo Hernández-Bello Isabel Yordi Aguirre Nduku Kilonzo Authors of background papers
    [Show full text]
  • Black Workers Matter: How the District’S History of Exploitation & Discrimination Continues to Harm Black Workers by Doni Crawford and Kamolika Dasi
    JANUARY 28, 2020 Black Workers Matter: How the District’s History of Exploitation & Discrimination Continues to Harm Black Workers By Doni Crawford and Kamolika Dasi The District’s economy is strong on a number of important indicators such as employment, job growth, and increased wages, but the overall trends mask staggering racial inequalities. The District’s deep history of exploitation and discrimination against Black workers—including stolen labor when DC was a hub for slavery, restrictions of free Black workers to the lowest-paid jobs, federal government job discrimination through much of the 20th century, and exclusion of many Black workers from New Deal labor laws—led to present-day racial disparities in many employment-related metrics including occupations, wages, employment levels, benefits, and opportunities to grow wealth. The differences in employment and income opportunities between Black DC residents and white DC residents are stark. Black residents are seven times as likely as white residents to be unemployed, despite actively looking for work, which cannot be attributed to differences in education or skills-training alone. Similarly, vast racial wealth differences cannot be explained by education, employment, or income alone. Black workers have been excluded from wealth-building opportunities such as homeownership, high-paying jobs and high-value business ownership. This report further finds that: THE GENDER SPECTRUM COLLECTION • There are major disparities in the most common occupations held by Black workers compared with white workers. Black workers are more likely to work jobs that require manual labor and pay lower wages than white workers, such as cashiers, janitors and building cleaners.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Company of Men: Male Dominance and Sexual Harassment
    IN THE COMPANY OF MEN The Northeastern Series on Gender, Crime, and Law edited by Claire Renzetti, St. Joseph’s University Battered Women in the Courtroom: The Power of Judicial Responses James Ptacek Divided Passions: Public Opinions on Abortion and the Death Penalty Kimberly J. Cook Emotional Trials: The Moral Dilemmas of Women Criminal Defense Attorneys Cynthia Siemsen Gender and Community Policing: Walking the Talk Susan L. Miller Harsh Punishment: International Experiences of Women’s Imprisonment edited by Sandy Cook and Susanne Davies Listening to Olivia: Violence, Poverty, and Prostitution Jody Raphael No Safe Haven: Stories of Women in Prison Lori B. Girshick Saving Bernice: Battered Women, Welfare, and Poverty Jody Raphael Understanding Domestic Homicide Neil Websdale Woman-to-Woman Sexual Violence: Does She Call It Rape? Lori B. Girshick IN THE COMPANY OF MEN Male Dominance and Sexual Harassment Edited by James E. Gruber and Phoebe Morgan Northeastern University Press Northeastern University Press Copyright by James E. Gruber and Phoebe Morgan All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purposes of criticism and review, no part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system now known or to be invented, without written permission of the publisher. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data In the company of men : male dominance and sexual harassment / edited by James E. Gruber and Phoebe Morgan. p. cm. — (The Northeastern series on gender, crime, and law) --- (cl : alk. paper)— --- (pa : alk. paper) .
    [Show full text]