Feminization U-Shaped Curve

BOX 1.1 Alternative Explanations for the Much-Debated Feminization U-Shaped Curve The literature has put forward several factors as explanations for countries not showing a U-shaped pattern of FLFP and income.

Institutional and Cultural Factors Restrictions associated with religion appear to have a strong relationship with FLFP in the Middle East and North Africa Region, where Verme (2015) finds no clear evidence of a U-shape—although it does exist in southern Mediterranean countries (Tsani et al. 2013; Verme 2015). Outside that region, countries sharing the same religion have contrasting results. There is evidence of a U-shaped link between FLFP and economic growth in Pakistan (Mujahid and Zafar 2012) but not in Turkey, which has a reverse U-shaped link (Dogan and Akyüz 2017). Socialism has also had a strong and lasting impact on FLFP rates, as seen in countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia (Klasen 2019). Socialism strongly promoted an ideology of gender equality, reflected by legal changes toward equality, universal schooling, and policies to promote the compatibility of employment with having small children (Klasen 1993). In addition, the persistent labor shortages associated with inefficient state-owned enterprises and collective farms necessitated more workers, and drawing more women into the labor force was essential for growth (Kornai 1992). Thus, cultural norms play an important but not a deterministic role.

The Education Factor LMICs do not necessarily experience a decline in FLFP as national incomes increase, because economic growth is often accompanied by planned expansions in education. Education is an important enabler for women to obtain high-skill jobs as the economy develops (Lincove 2008). Education is particularly seen as a potential booster for incorporating women into the labor force. In Latin America and the Caribbean and in East Asia, education policy has strongly increased the numbers of female university graduates (Gasparini and Marchionni 2017). More-educated women are usually paid higher wages, reinforcing the importance of education in FLFP (Lam and Duryea 1999). In Bangladesh, Brazil, and South Africa, the FLFP rate is rising uniformly with education (Klasen et al. 2020; Rahman and Islam 2013).

Trade-Related Factors Women play an integral role in industrial employment and export production in LMICs (Lincove 2008). In Bangladesh, with the boom of the apparel industry and rise of livestock rearing (linked to access to microcredits), FLFP rates experienced a rapid increase after a low initial condition—without exhibiting the U-shaped path of development (Verick 2018). In the Middle East and North Africa, female participation is somewhat stronger in countries where export-oriented manufacturing and tourism play an important role (such as Egypt, Morocco, and Tunisia) than in the rest of the region (World Bank 2004). Further, firms may invest more in technology in response to imported competition (Bloom, Draca, and Van Reenen 2016) or to export market expansion (Bustos 2011). This helps the FLFP rate because computerization and technology upgrading reduces the demand for strength-intensive skills, which are often the comparative advantage of male workers (Juhn, Ujhelyi, and Villegas-Sanchez 2014).

Note: FLFP = female labor force participation; LMICs = low- and middle-income countries.