1GzuFGC

of macroeconomic policy on employmentcreation means that progress in redressingwomen’s socio-economic disadvantage in thelabour market is limited. And third, restrictivemacroeconomic policy choices mean that thereare insufficient resources to sustainably financesocial policies that support gender equality orto ensure that the ways in which spending andtaxation are conducted have positive, ratherthan negative, distributive consequences. Thenext sections explore each of these issues indetail.GENDER ISSUES IN MACROECONOMICPOLICY AND ITS GOALSMacroeconomic policy typically focuses onraising the level of GDP as its primary policygoal, with the expansion of GDP (growth) usedas a measure of economic progress. However,broader economic and social outcomes maybe more important to improving the lives thatwomen and men are able to lead, includingthrough enabling good health, access toeducation, decent employment opportunities,freedom from violence and a secure place to live.Alternative frameworks for evaluating progress—such as human rights or human development—emphasize what people are able to do orbecome in the course of their lives. Increases inGDP are important only as a means to bettersocial outcomes, including greater genderequality.Does gender equality contribute to growth?Researchers and policy makers have started topay greater attention to the relationship betweengender equality and economic growth. 12 Forexample, recent evidence on the relationshipbetween gender inequality in education and GDPlevels and growth suggests that more equalityin schooling is positively associated with GDP, atleast for lower- and middle-income countries. 13Reducing inequalities in schooling and raisingthe average level of women’s education appearsto support better economic performance, asmeasured by GDP per capita, and enhanceindividual productive capacities.Figure 4.1 graphs the ratio of female-tomalesecondary school enrolment againstper capita income, illustrating the positiverelationship between the level of GDP and gapsin educational attainment. 14 The ratio increaseswith average income, but as it approachesparity the relationship flattens out. This indicatesthat the relationship between the secondaryschool enrolment ratio and per capita incomeis different for low-income and high-incomecountries. As a general rule, greater equalityin education is associated with higher levels ofGDP. However, at lower income levels there isalso considerable variation in the female-tomaleratio of secondary school enrolment amongcountries with similar incomes, suggesting thatfactors other than average GDP are important.For example, Burkina Faso (US$1,435) andRwanda ($1,312) had similar levels of per capitaincome in 2011, but the ratio was significantlyhigher in Rwanda than Burkina Faso: 1.02compared to 0.78. This shows that even at lowerlevels of GDP it is possible to attain gender parityin education.The figure does not tell us whether it is economicgrowth that raises the enrolment ratio or whetherit is greater gender equality in secondaryeducation that supports higher incomes. Andfocusing on the female-to-male enrolmentratio gives an incomplete picture in terms ofsubstantive equality, because it does not controlfor the quality of education that young womenand men receive or differences in retention andattainment.Similarly, an increase in the female share oflabour force participation, or a reduction in thegap between women’s and men’s labour forceparticipation, has been shown to result in fastergrowth. 15 Women’s labour force participationrates are typically lower than men’s—in somecases significantly so—and women working inpaid employment are often concentrated in lowproductivityactivities in which earnings are low(see Chapter 2). These patterns of segregationindicate an inefficient allocation of labour inwhich women are prevented from participating in197