Gender Inequality: A Comparative View of the Challenges Ahead

The WAPPP Seminar this week was very special. Professor Mary C. Brinton, Department Chair of the Department of Sociology at Harvard and Professor Claudia Goldin, Henry Lee Professor of Economics also at Harvard, introduced the new Weatherhead Initiative on Comparative Gender Inequality (WIGI) at the University to "study comparative gender inequality in OECD countries and outline some of the major scholarly and policy challenges relating to the structure of work and its articulation with the family". This is an exciting three-year interdisciplinary, cross-Harvard project, that will work closely with WAPPP at HKS, but whose creation is motivated by a set of very specific questions that are increasingly important for post-industrial economies:

• Why are some industrialized countries moving rapidly towards gender equality while others are not?
• Why are changes in gender roles producing more household disruption in some rich societies than in others?
• How will US households share care duties for seniors?
• How do changes in the welfare state differently affect the wellbeing of men and women?
• How can public policy facilitate the dual earner/dual caregiver model?
• How can employers level playing field for all genders?
• What are the economic and productivity implications of not fully integrating high human capital women into the workforce?  

  Professor Claudia Goldin presents the Weatherhead Initiative on Gender Inequality

To answer these difficult questions, WIGI's first task is to build a community of students and scholars that are committed to studying these topics. There will be a strong focus on bringing in undergraduates, in fact, two of the first three events in Spring of 2016 will involve undergraduate seniors and juniors who will present their senior thesis research or will begin working on one. Graduate students are also welcome and expected to play a significant role.

WIGI will work on the intersections of different thematic areas each year. In the first year, the focus will be the intersection of labor markets and household decisions related to gender. The second year will address issues at the intersection of household decisions and public policy, and the third will feature activities involving labor markets and public policy.

 

  Professor Mary C. Brinton

 

Professor Brinton went further into detail about the topic of discussion for WIGI's first year. She started by showing the situation of workers in a place with which everybody in the audience was very familiar: Harvard University. Using the 2013 Faculty Climate Survey, she showed the number of hours per day that faculty allotted to work and to domestic and care duties, and found that although male and female faculty work the same amount of hours, the women at all levels of seniority engage in significantly more hours of housework than their male counterparts. This difference is much larger for Junior Faculty. On average, female tenured faculty members put in ten more hours of work in the home than male tenured faculty. Untenured female professors put in twenty more hours than male untenured professors. "This is very, very local," the Professor warned, "this is us".

Female faculty at Harvard spend 10-20 more hrs. 

on domestic work than male faculty

She also spoke about higher relative stress levels for female faculty, with some of the most common cited reasons being childcare and children's education. She explained that on the one hand, women have become increasingly educated, and their college graduation levels now surpass the men's in developed economies, but that on the other hand, not much has changed in the domestic arena, where women are expected to work more. This tension, she believes, is a driving force behind lower fertility rates and the aging populations in rich countries: "It's really, really hard to work full time and be mothers".

She then discussed the case of Japan, where she conducts a good amount of her research, and where this phenomenon is producing difficult consequences. Fertility rates in Japan have been under population replacement level, that is, under 2 children per woman, for over thirty years. The country is running out of a labor force, but the model has not yet become friendly to a dual earner-dual caregiver family model. Instead, many highly skilled women are pushed out of the labor force when they become mothers by a context that requires long working hours of both genders and does not provide incentives for males to take part in caregiving duties.

Professor Goldin continued this discussion by touching the topic of occupations, to see what makes some more friendly for the dual family model than others. She mentioned how sometimes the gender wage gap is explained by stating the fact that women tend to go into lower-paying, care-related occupations, and used data evidencing within-occupation pay gaps to show how that explanation is incomplete. For example, women in finance can earn up to 35% less than men in finance, while women in tech are earning 10% less than males in that sector.

But why is there a gap between occupations? She explained this by pointing out an important difference in the wage structures of each field. Using O*NET data from the Department of Labor, she showed that the gender gap is larger in occupations like finance, where there is a linear relationship between earnings and hours worked, than in tech, where people are remunerated more based on output. The latter structure favors women because, as was mentioned, they face higher demand for their time outside the workplace. In industries where there is temporal flexibility, women thrive (although it remains noteworthy that even in these fields there is still a gap, albeit smaller).

She suggested that a possible way to make any workplace more time-flexible would be to make employees more interchangeable. If in each workplace there are two workers who can easily substitute for each other at any point, they will have much more freedom to step in and out at times that work for them. This model can free men and women to take on more roles in the home. You can "fix the men", you can "fix the women", but until you actually "fix the firms and the occupations", modify the whole model, inequality will persist, she argued. 

Want to stay updated about activities related to this promising new initiative? Email jbarnard@wcfia.harvard.edu to subscribe to the mailing list!

What Works: Closing the Gender Wage Gap in Boston

As part of HUB Week, the Women and Public Policy Program at the Harvard Kennedy School presented a panel discussion about the public-private-academic partnership facilitated by the Office of the Mayor of Boston and the Boston Women's Workforce Council that resulted in innovative, research-based interventions to reduce the wage gap in the city. Victoria A. Budson, Executive Director, Women and Public Policy Program moderated panelists Iris Bohnet,  Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Women and Public Policy Program; Megan Costello, Executive Director of the Mayor's Office of Women's Advancement, City of Boston; Katharine Lusk, Executive Director of the Initiative on Cities, Boston University; and Michelle Wu, Councilor At-Large, Boston City Council.

The first step to look for ways to reduce the wage gap is the applicant's first contact with any employer, the recruitment process. Professor Bohnet started the panel with a discussion about reducing bias in interview processes. Bias is very difficult to eliminate, we are all biased in one way or another, "it has something to do with how our minds work... we are all affected by these biases independent of our own demographic characteristics" she explained. Her research focuses on ways to "debunk" these cognitive glitches in order to improve recruitment and interview processes. Research has shown that interviews are not particularly strong tools for predicting future on-the-job performance, "blind evaluations are great, but in most of your jobs those aren't possible." What is the next best option? There is a way to structure an interview to make it more useful: "You should force yourself to ask every job candidate the very same five questions, in the same order, and ideally... compare question by question". She shared that this is actually the way she grades papers students write for her class!

WAPPP Panel Discussion on the wage gap in Boston, part of HUB Week

Katharine Lusk, who according to Victoria Budson, "really began the transition and change around these metrics in the city" followed Professor Bohnet's intervention. She talked about what former Kennedy School Professor Samantha Power referred to as being a "bureaucratic samurai", which essentially means having the ability to defy the status quo while still being able to operate within a bureaucratic setting. In Ted Kennedy's words, it means knowing how to operationalize good intentions. Katharine was working with former Mayor Thomas Menino, when he set out, in 2013, to make Boston "the premiere city for working women". They focused on creating evidence-based policy to benefit women, including capital resources for early educators, support for women entrepreneurs and women in STEM, and of course, pay equity. They created the Women's Workforce Council in a model of collaborative governance as "a new way of solving a very old and tractable problem". This effort brought talent to the table. The Mayor's Office then formed further coalitions with businesses and with a team at Boston University, which figured out a way for employers to share sensitive wage data anonymously, in order to provide the city with information that allowed them to determine just how large the wage gap is.

Victoria Budson noted that "it's really about whether your ideas catch fire", and that enlisting stakeholders beyond those who obviously benefit from a policy, as Katharine did, is key to getting things done in government. She then introduced the next speaker, Megan Costello, who spoke about her experience as the Campaign Director for Mayor Marty Walsh and now as the Executive Director of the Mayor's Office of Women's Advancement, who works closely with the Women's Workforce Council. "We have to be intentional about diversity," she said, and explained that their approach is three-pronged: they are focusing on working with businesses so they can join the data effort previously set up by Katharine Lusk and her team; secondly, they are working with individual women setting up helpful tools for them, like free workshops on salary negotiation, and finally, they are working on supporting equal pay legislation. Their aim is to really change the culture. Ambitious but possible.

Finally, City Councilor At-Large Michelle Wu, spoke about the importance of having leaders of different perspectives sitting at the table; they can pave the way for change. She said she is convinced there is no better place in the world to be making change than in Boston, a city that is blessed with incredible resources for innovation. "Government innovation is not an oxymoron!", she exclaimed. She spoke about her efforts, working together with the Mayor's Office, to make parental leave a reality for Boston families, and other work she had been able to do as a City Councilor like putting in place a training program for the Boston Housing Authority to assist domestic violence victims, and even make the forms at the Registry friendly for all types of families, including same-sex couples. As the youngest serving member of the Council and the first Asian American to be elected as Councilor, she was a true inspiration.

The audience was very enthusiastic and put forth a number of questions and comments. A wonderful closing for a conversation full of insights, new ideas, and exciting work, all pointing towards achieving equality for women.

The Conversation Continues

In the last month, a couple of important things happened in the world of gender news:

1. U.S. Department of Defense removed the ban on women serving in combat roles.
2. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton - arguably the most powerful woman in American politics - ended her tenure at the State Department, highlighting gender equality as "the unfinished business of the 21st century."
3. WAPPP Wire ran its first guest blogger series, inviting men to write about gender. 

Ok, one of these things is not quite as high-profile as the others, so if you missed #3, please take a look at the statistics in "Why Diversity Matters in Medicine" and read the story of a brave woman named Pashtana in "Providing a Voice to Afghan Women". I would like to thank Robert and Dan for taking the time to engage in this conversation. I hope that by adding their voices to the discussion, they reached a new audience of American men, like Pashtana did with Afghan women.

To continue the conversations on gender issues affecting all of us, I hope more HKS men will attend the weekly WAPPP Seminars held on Thursdays at 11:40am in the WAPPP Cason Seminar Room. This semester's line-up will range from the Olympics to the boardroom to "questionable behavior." Intrigued? Come this Thursday, February 7 (there is lunch too!).

And if you (man or woman) have an idea to contribute to this blog, please contact me at anya_malkov@hks13.harvard.edu, and let’s keep talking about gender!


Anya Malkov is an MPP candidate at the Harvard Kennedy School, a WAPPP Cultural Bridge Fellow, and an alumna of From Harvard Square to the Oval Office.

Let's Talk About Gender

Today the 113^th Congress is getting sworn in. There is more gender diversity this time than ever before – 20 out of 100 Senators and 81 out of 435 Representatives are women. Still, the gender gap is evident.

There is also a gender diversity issue among people who like to learn about gender gaps. Among attendees of weekly WAPPP seminars last semester, the percentage of men in the room never got above 30 percent. And when 60 people crowded into the room for a particularly well-attended session on “Race, Gender and Dynamics of Social Hierarchy Reversal”, only 7 of them were men – 12 percent.

This is disappointing to me. I want to discuss gender with women and men, because social and political implications of gender affect all of us. Instead I face the situation that Debora Spar described best: 

“All too often, women are scared of raising the topic of gender with men, thinking it will brand them as radicals or troublemakers, while men are terrified of saying or doing anything that might classify them as politically incorrect. The result, of course, is that no one says anything productive at all.”

This observation stood out to me as a rarely-acknowledged truth, even though it was not the focus of her article.

In an attempt to spark dialogue, I asked a few of my male colleagues at the Harvard Kennedy School to share some thoughts on gender in the context of their personal and professional experiences. I will feature their posts over the next couple of weeks. 

If you are a male reader interested in contributing to these guest-blogger series, please contact me at anya_malkov@hks13.harvard.edu, and let’s talk about gender! 

Anya Malkov is an MPP candidate at the Harvard Kennedy School, a WAPPP Cultural Bridge Fellow, and an alumna of From Harvard Square to the Oval Office.

Obama and America's Political Future...and Women!

Theda Skocpol is a rock star of the political science world. Her lecture on “Obama and America’s Political Future” drew a crowd to the WAPPP Cason Seminar room. I have never seen so many men at a WAPPP lunch before. Something tells me it’s because the topic was not gender this time...And yet, here are the top five women-related highlights from the conversation:

5. Women are a politically relevant demographic. In case you were wondering why both presidential campaigns are aggressively pursuing women, it is because women vote in higher numbers than men do. They trend Democratic. When they vote, they tend to be more aware of how policies may affect their families. 

4. The Tea Party is teeming with women – older white women, given the demographics of this movement. Professor Skocpol, who co-authored the first in-depth book on the Tea Party, said that the women were the lifeblood of the local chapters. They organized the meetings, brought the snacks and shouldered most of the work of the grassroots movement, but they stopped there. “Just like in every other movement” Professor Skocpol reflected “the women did not advance to the top or become candidates.”

3. Women in Election 2012: Issues and Voters is currently highlighted on the Scholars Strategy Network website. The SSN, which Professor Skocpol directs, brings together America’s leading scholars to address important public policy problems in language that anyone can understand. 

2. Elizabeth Warren, the Democratic Senate challenger from Massachusetts, might benefit from the high number of educated female voters in the state. However, Professor Skocpol said Massachusetts is a historically difficult place for a woman to win. To illustrate the surprising ways that sexism manifests here, she described recent behavior of incumbent Senator Brown’s staffers at a Warren rally as “reminiscent of teenage boys trying to annoy their teacher.”  

1. “Hillary Clinton is going to run for President. And win.” Answering the question “Do you think Hillary Clinton might consider running?”

I should mention that in the best tradition of effective lecturing, Professor Skocpol also took us through the challenges the Obama administration has faced, dissected the failures of the administration to address some of those challenges, and explained the Tea Party practice of “kick-ass politics.”  She covered much more ground than I could possibly fit here, and even left us with some things to ponder for 2016. 

It’s as simple as it is profound...

The Woman: Melanne Verveer, U.S. Ambassador-at-large for Global Women’s Issues

Last week I had the honor of hearing Ambassador Verveer speak to a crowded room of incredibly impressive women -- the capstone to three days of events, courtesy of the Women in Public Policy bi-annual board meeting. While this post will certainly fall short of the event, I will try and capture just a smidgeon of the essence from someone whose impact is as simple as it is profound: focus on women.  

Four Areas

Ambassador Verveer stressed four areas critical to elevating the status of women: 

1. Access to education
2. Economic participation
3. Access to basic health care
4. Political engagement

These four simple criteria provide both the foundation, as well as the strategies, to gauge and increase the status of women anywhere in the world. And, unfortunately, nowhere does parity on all four of these criteria exist. 

Why are these areas important? 

Education: When women and girls are educated, it provides a positive feedback loop that breaks the cycle of poverty. Girls marry later, have fewer children, raise healthier families, and are more likely to invest in their community. It has an exponential, and extensive, ripple effect that raises individuals and communities out of poverty. It is often colloquially referred to as The Girl Effect.

Economic participation: When women have access to economic opportunities, they reinvest 90 percent -- 90 percent -- into their families, communities, and countries. They raise the standard of living not just for themselves, but the world around them. They invest in the education of their children, the resources of their communities, and their household and financial assets. In places where banking sectors are slim or nonexistent, increased assets in the form of livestock or crops often serve as a necessary form of capital to protect against financial shocks, usually for medical emergencies. 

However, it goes beyond this; in countries where women are economically empowered, the entire countries’ GDP rises. Goldman Sachs calls it “Womenomics”. At a 2011 APEC summit, Secretary Clinton remarked that, “by increasing women’s participation in the economy and enhancing their efficiency and productivity, we can bring about a dramatic impact on the competitiveness and growth of our economies.” Ambassador Verveer also gave this staggering statistic: $46 billion is lost in economic growth from restricted job opportunities for women. The numbers seem to speak for themselves, but they are infrequently echoed.

Healthcare: In addition to economic inclusion, and especially in developing counties, having access to basic healthcare services is critical to ensuring equality. Women and girls are less likely to receive necessary immunizations or medical treatment, and limited financial resources are often extended only for boys. However, when women and girls have access to basic medical care, they are less likely to die in childbirth, more likely to see their children live past the age of five, and tend to raise healthier families. It provides another mechanism to break the cycle of poverty while simultaneously decreasing maternal and child mortality rates. 

Political participation: Political engagement is paramount. In countries where women are not allowed to receive inheritance or are denied property rights, they lack the legal and political rights to change these laws and policies. Even in the U.S., women represent less than 17 percent of Congress. Holding such a minimal amount of power prevents the dialogue and discourse from tackling issues impacting 50 percent of the population -- equal pay, preventative health care, and violence against women. Outside the U.S., and in newly minted countries, constitutions are being written without a single female voice. The inclusion and acceptance of women in the political process is essential to increasing their equality.

While these four areas are essential, they are not exhaustive. Ambassador Verveer discussed several other arenas where the role of women are paramount, yet often neglected. 

Women, Peace and Security

In December of last year, the U. S. State Department released the U.S. Action Plan on Women, Peace, and Security. The plan calls for women to be integrated into peace processes, conflict-prevention, transitional committees, and negotiating teams. Perhaps more importantly, it provides a bold declaration from the U.S. government that women are essential, perhaps even the crucial linchpin, to continued peace, stability and prosperity for countries. Personally, I like to believe the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize Laureates send a similar international message. 

Women are the canary

Ambassador Verveer said the State Department often views the role of women in a society as the canary. In regions where international security concerns are heightened, the role of women can speak volumes about the direction the country is headed. While the Ambassador did not mention specific situations, the metaphor easily translates: when the role of women is silenced or compromised, countries often find themselves headed towards instability.  

The importance of allies

Ambassador Verveer added an additional, often overlooked, component to the discussion - the importance of allies, specifically men, in securing the equality and inclusion of women. Allies are fundamental to encouraging this paradigm shift in women’s economic and political participation.  “Women’s issues are still perceived as ‘soft’. In reality, women’s issues are the hardest issues out there.” However, this asymmetry in power can be broken, especially when groups are familiar with the social, moral, and economic justifications of women's rights.  

Melissa Sandgren is a MPP1 at the Harvard Kennedy School and a participant in WAPPP's From Harvard Square to the Oval Office program.

*Photo cpyright World Economic Forum (www.weforum.org) / Photo Eric Miller emiller@iafrica.com