1GzuFGC

Figure 2.1Labour force participation rate by sex and region, 1990–2013Globally, women’s labour force participation rates have stagnated, albeit with significant regional variationPer cent90807060504030201076207522853580828054403074546950846979627349685380 8177 7764595250MalesFemalesGender gap01990201319902013199020131990201319902013199020131990201319902013MENA SA LAC CEECA EAP Developed SSA WorldSource: Weighted averages calculated by UN Women using data from ILO 2015c.Note: Regions are as follows: CEECA (Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia); Developed (Developed Regions); EAP (East Asia and the Pacific); LAC (Latin America and the Caribbean);MENA (Middle East and North Africa); SA (South Asia); SSA (sub-Saharan Africa). See UN Women’s regional groupings for the list of countries and territories included in each region in Annex 7.Meanwhile, women’s LFPR decreased in Centraland Eastern Europe and Central Asia, in East Asiaand the Pacific as well as in South Asia, regionsthat account for about 60 per cent of the globalfemale population of working age. 38 The decline inwomen’s LFPR in South Asia is mostly the result oflower participation rates in India due to youngerwomen staying in education, and a general lack ofemployment opportunities for women. 39In Central and Eastern Europe and CentralAsia, the drop in economic output following thedismantling of state socialism and the transition toa market economy have had a negative impact onemployment, despite some recovery since 2000.Since the transition, these countries have also placedless emphasis on policies that enable women tocombine work and family responsibilities. The resultof these factors combined is that women’s LFPR hasnot recovered to pre-transition levels. 40Greater opportunities or quest for survival?Increases in women’s LFPR may indicategreater opportunities for women to access paidemployment. In some countries in Latin America,targeted labour market, macroeconomic andsocial policies have contributed to a growth informal employment, which has benefited women(see Box 2.2).Declining fertility rates have also played a part inincreasing LFPR among women of prime workingage (25–54). Globally, median female LFPR for thisage group increased by 11 percentage points from63 to 74 per cent, while median male participationrates in the same age group changed very little,from 95 to 94 per cent. During their reproductiveyears (between ages 20 and 44), women’s laboursupply reduces by the equivalent of nearly twoyears for each child born. Reductions in medianfertility rates from 5.2 to 2.4 children per womanover the last four decades 41 may have increasedfemale labour supply by 5.3 years, or 12 per cent ofa woman’s uninterrupted working life. 42But for some women, higher LFPR also reflect the‘distress sale of labour’, whereby poverty and lackof social protection drive women into the labourmarket to meet survival needs. 43 In developingeconomies, coverage of unemployment insurance