How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps.

Methods for estimating the scope of unjustified inequality differ in their sensitivity to address institutional and structural deficiencies. In the case of gender wage gaps, adjusting adequately for individual characteristics requires prior assessment of several important deficiencies, primarily whe...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Karolina Goraus Tanska, Joanna Tyrowicz, Lucas Augusto van der Velde
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2020-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241107
id doaj-0a369c2a9b384110a7b527ff012dac07
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0a369c2a9b384110a7b527ff012dac072021-03-04T12:25:40ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032020-01-011511e024110710.1371/journal.pone.0241107How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps.Karolina Goraus TanskaJoanna TyrowiczLucas Augusto van der VeldeMethods for estimating the scope of unjustified inequality differ in their sensitivity to address institutional and structural deficiencies. In the case of gender wage gaps, adjusting adequately for individual characteristics requires prior assessment of several important deficiencies, primarily whether a given labor market is characterized by gendered selection into employment, gendered segmentation and whether these mechanisms differ along the distribution of wages. Given that countries are characterized by differentiated prevalence of these deficiencies, ranking countries on gender wage gaps is a challenging task. Whether a country is perceived as more equal than others depends on the interaction between the method of adjusting gender wage gap for individual characteristics and the prevalence of these deficiencies. We make the case that this interaction is empirically relevant by comparing the country rankings for the adjusted gender wage gap among 23 EU countries. In this relatively homogeneous group of countries, the interaction between method and underlying deficiencies leads to substantial variation in the extent of unjustified inequality. A country may change its place in the ranking by as much as ten positions-both towards greater equality and towards greater inequality. We also show that, if explored properly, this variability can yield valuable policy insights: changes in the ranking positions across methods inform on the policy priority of the labor market deficiencies across countries in relative terms.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241107
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Karolina Goraus Tanska
Joanna Tyrowicz
Lucas Augusto van der Velde
spellingShingle Karolina Goraus Tanska
Joanna Tyrowicz
Lucas Augusto van der Velde
How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Karolina Goraus Tanska
Joanna Tyrowicz
Lucas Augusto van der Velde
author_sort Karolina Goraus Tanska
title How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps.
title_short How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps.
title_full How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps.
title_fullStr How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps.
title_full_unstemmed How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps.
title_sort how rankings disguise gender inequality: a comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2020-01-01
description Methods for estimating the scope of unjustified inequality differ in their sensitivity to address institutional and structural deficiencies. In the case of gender wage gaps, adjusting adequately for individual characteristics requires prior assessment of several important deficiencies, primarily whether a given labor market is characterized by gendered selection into employment, gendered segmentation and whether these mechanisms differ along the distribution of wages. Given that countries are characterized by differentiated prevalence of these deficiencies, ranking countries on gender wage gaps is a challenging task. Whether a country is perceived as more equal than others depends on the interaction between the method of adjusting gender wage gap for individual characteristics and the prevalence of these deficiencies. We make the case that this interaction is empirically relevant by comparing the country rankings for the adjusted gender wage gap among 23 EU countries. In this relatively homogeneous group of countries, the interaction between method and underlying deficiencies leads to substantial variation in the extent of unjustified inequality. A country may change its place in the ranking by as much as ten positions-both towards greater equality and towards greater inequality. We also show that, if explored properly, this variability can yield valuable policy insights: changes in the ranking positions across methods inform on the policy priority of the labor market deficiencies across countries in relative terms.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241107
work_keys_str_mv AT karolinagoraustanska howrankingsdisguisegenderinequalityacomparativeanalysisofcrosscountrygenderequalityrankingsbasedonadjustedwagegaps
AT joannatyrowicz howrankingsdisguisegenderinequalityacomparativeanalysisofcrosscountrygenderequalityrankingsbasedonadjustedwagegaps
AT lucasaugustovandervelde howrankingsdisguisegenderinequalityacomparativeanalysisofcrosscountrygenderequalityrankingsbasedonadjustedwagegaps
_version_ 1714802812630597632