Abstract
This article presents a composite indicator designed to measure and compare existing structural gender equality in the countries of the European Union. The construction of an index is always a complex task which requires making a great many important conceptual, analytical and empirical decisions. This complexity explains the wide variety of gender equality indices created during the last 25 years. All the proposed indices attempt to measure the same thing, gender (in)equality, but none of them define the concept they want to measure in exactly the same way, nor do they operationalize measurement in the same manner. Taking into account the methodology of these preceding approaches, this article explains the basis for the most important analytical and conceptual decisions made in constructing the European Gender Equality Index. The article also includes the overall scores obtained by the 27 European countries on this index, on its three basic dimensions (education, work and power), and on the eighteen indicators that make up its structure. With this data, corresponding to 2009, an adequate analysis of gender equality in Europe can be established.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
\( \log \left( {x \cdot y} \right) = \log (x) + \log (y) \); \( \log \left( {{x \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {x y}} \right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace} y}} \right) = \log (x) - \log (y) \)
ln 20/80 = −1.386 and ln 80/20 = +1.386.
Even if indicators are standardized, the correlation structure will also affect the Index scores, hence more correlated indicators will have greater impact than those that are randomly correlated with the rest.
\( \mathcal{W}_{ijk} = \frac{1}{{n_{i} }} \cdot \frac{1}{{n_{j} }} \cdot \frac{1}{{n_{k} }}\mathcal{W}_{ijk} \) is the implicit weighting of indicator k, pertaining to subdimension j, and to dimension i. With \( n_{i} \) being the number of dimensions of the index; \( n_{j} \) the number of subdimensions of dimension i; and \( n_{k} \) the number of indicators of subdimension j.
References
Apodaca, C. (1998). Measuring women’s economic and social rights achievement. Human Rights Quarterly, 20, 139–172.
Bardhan, K., & Klasen, S. (1999). UNDP’s gender-related indices: A critical review. World Development, 27(6), 985–1010.
Bericat, E. & Sánchez, E. (2008). Balance de la desigualdad de género en España. Un sistema de indicadores sociales (Fundación Centro de Estudios Andaluces). Actualidad, 23, 4–29.
Beteta, H. C. (2006). What is missing in measures of women’s empowerment? Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 7(2), 221–241.
Biström, E. & Nilsson, H. (2010). Measuring gender equality. A review of gender equality measures. Available at: http://www9.umu.se/soc/utbildning/Uppsatser%20vt%202010/Elin%20Bistr%F6m.pdf.
Branisa, B., Klasen, S. & Ziegler, M. (2009). New measures of gender equality: The social institutions and gender index (SIGI) and its subindices. Available at: http://www.inesad.edu.bo/bcde2009/A1%20Branisa%20Klasen%20Ziegler.pdf.
Di Noia, J. (2002). Indicators of gender equality for American states and regions: An update. Social Indicators Research, 59, 35–77.
Dijkstra, A. G. (2002). Revisiting UNDP’s GDI and GEM: Towards an alternative. Social Indicators Research, 57, 301–338.
Dijkstra, A. G. (2006). Towards a fresh start in measuring gender equality: A contribution to the debate. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 7(2), 275–283.
Dijkstra, A. G., & Hanmer, L. C. (2000). Measuring socio-economic gender inequality: Toward an alternative to the UNDP gender-related development index. Feminist Economics, 6(2), 41–75.
Economic Commission for Africa (2004). The African gender and development index. Addis Abeba: ECA.
Esping-Andersen, G. (2009). The incomplete revolution. Adapting to women’s new roles. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Folbre, N. (2006). Measuring care: Gender, empowerment, and the care economy. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 7(2), 183–199.
Fraser, N. (1997). After the family wage: A postindustrial thought experiment. In B. Hobson & A. M. Berggren (Eds.), Crossing borders. Gender and citizenship in transition (pp. 21–55). Sweden: Swedish Council forPlanning and Coordination of Research.
Frias, S. (2008). Measuring structural gender equality in Mexico: A state level analysis. Social Indicators Research, 88, 215–246.
Hank, K. & Jürges, H. (2005). Gender and the division of household labor in older couples: A European perspective. Working Paper No. 76, Mannheim Research Institute for the Economics of Aging, Mannheim.
Harvey, E. B., Blakely, J. H., & Tepperman, L. (1990). Toward an index of gender equality. Social Indicators Research, 22, 299–317.
Hochschild, A. R. (1989). The second schift. New York: Penguin Books.
Johnston, D. F. (1985). The development of social statistics and indicators on the status of women. Social Indicators Research, 16(3), 233–261.
Jütting, J. P., Morrison, Ch., Dayton-Johnson, J., & Dreschler, D. (2008). Measuring gender (in)equality: The OECD gender, institutions and development data base. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 9(1), 65–86.
Kjeldstad, R., & Kristiansen, J. E. (2001). Constructing a regional gender equality index: Reflections on a first experience with Norwegian data. Statistical Journal of the United Nations ECE, 18(2001), 41–49.
Klasen, S. (2006). UNDP’s gender-related measures: Some conceptual problems and possible solutions. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 7(2), 243–274.
Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Rosenberg, M. (1955). The language of social research. New York: The Free Press.
Martinez, J., & Cairó, G. (2004). Gender and regional inequality in human development: The case of Spain. Feminist Economics, 10(1), 37–64.
Mehta, A. K. (1996). Recasting indices for developing countries: A gender empowerment Measure. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(43).
Mehta, A. K. (2009). Gendered human development indices: Recasting the gender development index and gender empowerment measure for India. Available at: http://undp.org.in/sites/default/files/GDI_and_GEM_Report.pdf.
Permanyer, I. (2008). On the measurement of gender equality and gender-related development levels. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 9(1), 87–108.
Permanyer, I. (2010). The measurement of multidimensional gender inequality: Continuing the debate. Social Indicators Research, 95, 181–198.
Permanyer, I., & Beneria, L. (2010). The measurement of socio-economic gender inequality revisited. Development and Change, 41(3), 375–399.
Plantenga, J., Remery, Ch., Figueiredo, H., & Smith, M. (2009). Towards a European union gender equality index. Journal of European Social Policy, 19(1), 19–33.
Plumer, K. (2003). Intimate citizenship. Private decisions and public dialogues. London: University of Washington Press.
Schüler, D. (2006). The uses and misuses of the gender-related development index and gender empowerment measure: A review of the literature. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 7(2), 161–181.
Sen, A. (1998). Development as freedom. New York: Knopf.
Social Watch (2005). Social watch report 2005: Roars and whispers. Montevideo: Social Watch.
Social Watch (2006–2010). Social watch report 2010. Available at: http://www.socialwatch.org/annualReport
Sugarman, D. B., & Straus, M. A. (1988). Indicators of gender equality from American states and regions. Social Indicators Research, 20, 229–270.
UNDP (1990–2010). Human development report 1995. Available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2002/chapters/.
Weber, M. (1979). Economía y Sociedad. Mexico: Fondo de Cultua Económica.
World Economic Forum (2005–2010). The global gender gap report (2005–2010). Available at: http://www.weforum.org/en/Communities/Women%20Leaders%20and%20Gender%20Parity/GenderGapNetwork/index.htm.
Yllö, K. (1984). The status of women, marital equality, and violence against wives. A contextual analysis. Journal of Family Issues, 5(3), 307–320.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bericat, E. The European Gender Equality Index: Conceptual and Analytical Issues. Soc Indic Res 108, 1–28 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9872-z
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9872-z