Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Finding Women in Public Policy

218 views

Published on

Prepared for class discussion on the impact of public policy on women and the need for gender analysis in policy development

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Finding Women in Public Policy

  1. 1. GENDER  MAINSTREAMING  Finding  a  place  for  women  in  public  policy  
  2. 2. Gender   •  Mainstreaming  a  gender  perspec@ve  is  the  Mainstreaming  is   process  of  assessing  the  implica@ons  for  a  Strategy   women  and  men  of  any  planned  ac@on,  Defined   including  legisla@on,  policies  or  programs,   in  all  areas  and  at  all  levels.       •  It  is  a  strategy  for  making  womens  as  well   as  mens  concerns  and  experiences  an   integral  dimension  of  the  design,   implementa@on,  monitoring  and   evalua@on  of  policies  and  programs  in  all   poli@cal,  economic  and  societal  spheres  so   that  women  and  men  benefit  equally  and   inequality  is  not  perpetuated.       •  The  ul@mate  goal  is  to  achieve  gender   equality  
  3. 3. PUBLIC  POLICY  CAN   • Gender  unequal  BE:   • Gender  neutral   • Gender  blind   • Gender  specific     • Gender  responsive/ redistribu5ve  
  4. 4. •  Gender  unequal  –  unequal  EXAMPLES?   treatment  based  on  gender   •  Gender  blind  –  don’t  take  into   account  gender  differences     •  Gender  neutral  -­‐  what  most   gender  blind  policies  are   thought  to  be   •  Gender  specific  –  prac@cal   needs   •  Gender  redistribu@ve  -­‐  strategic  
  5. 5. GENDER   Women  are  more  likely  to  be  in  BLIND   college  aWer  star@ng  a  family  &   to  take  break   •  Pell  grant  eligibility   •  Child  care  needs   •  Women  on  TANF  –  any  job  will   do,  limited  allowances  for   educa@on   •  Drug  crime  sentencing  
  6. 6. Gender  Disaggregated  Sta@s@cs  Global  Gender  Gap  Report  2012        World    Economic    Forum  
  7. 7. Global  Gender  Gap  -­‐  2012  Measures  gap  between  women  and  men  in  four  categories:  1.  Economic  par@cipa@on  and   opportunity:     •  female  labor  force  par@cipa@on,  wage   equality  &  the  percentage  of  women  in   high-­‐ranking  jobs.  2.  Educa@onal  a]ainment     •  female  literacy  &  school  enrollment  3.  Health  and  survival   •  female  and  male  life   expectancy  and  mortality  rates.  4.  Poli@cal  empowerment   •  number  of  women  holding  poli@cal   office  as  well  as  the  number  of  female   heads  of  state  over  the  last  50  years.  
  8. 8. GGG  2012  United  States  
  9. 9. Gender  Inequality  Index  •  Reflects  women’s  disadvantage  in  three  dimensions   •  reproduc@ve  health,     •  empowerment  and  the     •  labour  market  •  The  index  shows  the  loss  in  human  development  due   to  inequality  between  female  and  male  achievements   in  these  dimensions.    
  10. 10. Gender  Inequality  Index  
  11. 11. Gender  Inequality  Index  Table 4 - Gender Inequality Index and related indicators Reproductive Health Population with at least secondary Labour force Contraceptive education participation prevalence Gender Inequality Seats in (% ages 25 rate rate, any Births Index national and older) (%)method (% of At least one attended by Maternal Adolescent parliament (% married women antenatal visit skilled health Total fertility Rank Value mortality ratio fertility rate Female) Female Male Female Male ages 15–49) (%) personnel (%) rate HDI rank 2011 2011 2008 2011 a 2011 2010 2010 2009 2009 2005-2009b 2005-2009b 2005-2009b 2011 aVERY%HIGH%HUMAN%DEVELOPMENT 1 Norway 6 0.075 7 9.0 39.6 99.3 99.1 63.0 71.0 88.0 .. .. 2.0 2 Australia 18 0.136 8 16.5 28.3 95.1 97.2 58.4 72.2 71.0 100.0 100.0 2.0 3 Netherlands 2 0.052 9 5.1 37.8 86.3 89.2 59.5 72.9 69.0 .. 100.0 1.8 4 United States 47 0.299 24 41.2 16.8 95.3 94.5 58.4 71.9 73.0 .. 99.0 2.1
  12. 12. Other   •  Gender  Inequality  Index    Interna@onal   •  UNDP    Indices   •  Gender  Equity  Index     •  Social  Watch     •  Women  Economic  Opportunity  Index     •  The  Economist     •  Social  Ins@tu@ons  &  Gender  Index     •  OECD     •  Gender-­‐related  Development  Index   •  UNDP     •  Gender  Empowerment  Index     •  UNDP    
  13. 13. Tools  of  Gender  Mainstreaming   Gender  Budge@ng   Other  Tools  •  Used  primarily  outside  of   •  Gender  Audit   the  US   •  Gender  Impact  Assessment  •  Focuses  on  gendered  impact   •  Gender  Needs  Assessment   of  public  policy  budget   •  Monitoring  &  Evalua@on   decisions   •  Training  
  14. 14. Of  the  $10  billion  in  state  spending  cuts  already  made,  93  percent  have  targeted  educa@on,  health,  and  human  services  –  areas  that  dispropor@onally  employ  and  serve  women.  This  is  taking  a  major  toll  on  the  economic  well-­‐being,  health,  and  safety  of  women  and  their  families:  •  Fewer  jobs  for  women  and  persistent  overall  unemployment.  Over  half  of    public  service  jobs  are  in  educa@on,   health,  and  social  services,  where  women  make  up  nearly  three-­‐quarters  (72  percent)  of  the  workforce.  Cuts  in  these   areas  have  forced  a  large  number  of  women  out  of  work,  contribu@ng  to  stubbornly  high  unemployment  overall.  •  Women’s  economic  disadvantages  prior  to  the  recession  made  them  more  vulnerable  to  cuts.  Women  are  at   greater  risk  for  poverty  than  men  due  to  their  large  numbers  in  lower-­‐paying  fields  and  under-­‐representa@on  in   higher-­‐paying  jobs;  greater  likelihood  of  working  part-­‐@me;  earnings  that  are  lower,  on  average,  than  men’s;  and   their  role  as  primary  caregivers  for  children,  which  affects  whether  and  how  much  they  can  work.  •  Cuts  to  work  supports  especially  jeopardize  women’s  ability  to  work  and  meet  their  families’  basic  needs.  Time   limits  have  cut  23,000  Washingtonians  off  from  resources  that  support  work  and  keep  them  engaged  with  the   economy.  Over  27,000  fewer  families  are  receiving  assistance  to  help  them  afford  child  care  so  they  can  work.  AWer   recent  cuts,  cash  assistance  provides  just  27  percent  of  the  resources  families  need  to  meet  basic  needs.  •  Cuts  to  reproduc5ve  health  programs  threaten  maternal  and  child  health.  In  36  of  39  coun@es  in  Washington  state,   use  of  Maternity  Support  Services,  a  program  proven  to  promote  healthier  pregnancies  and  safer  births,  has   declined.  Forty-­‐nine  family  planning  agencies  have  lost  funding,  resul@ng  in  46,000  fewer  women  receiving  cri@cal   reproduc@ve  health  services.  •  Less  help  for  survivors  of  domes5c  violence  and  sexual  assault  as  need  is  rising.  The  Governor  has  proposed  cuts  to   assistance  for  vic@ms  of  violence  just  as  two  alarming  trends  appear  to  be  on  the  rise  in  Washington  –  more  women   are  seeking  help  for  domes@c  violence  and  sexual  assault,  and  are  increasingly  reques@ng  help  with  finding  shelter,   feeding  their  children  and  other  economic  hardships.    
  15. 15. Public  Policy  –  Gender  Impact  Assessment   At  Work   At  Risk  of  Violence  •  Minimum  wage  laws   •  Pros@tu@on  •  Equal  Pay   •  Human  Trafficking  •  Pregnancy  Discrimina@on   •  Domes@c  Violence  •  Family  &  Medical  Leave   •  Rape  •  Paid  Sick  Leave  •  Child  Care  Assistance  •  Unemployment  •  Job  Segrega@on  
  16. 16. Public  Policy  –  Gender  Impact  Assessment   In  the  Prison  System   Welfare  Reform  •  Sentencing  prac@ces  –   •  Focus  on  any  job   related  to  drug  offences     employment  has  reduced  •  Sexual  assault   number  of  low  income   women  pursuing  addi@onal   When  They  Re5re   educa@on   •  Labor  Force  par@cipa@on   •  Social  security    
  17. 17. Public  Policy  –  Gender  Impact  Assessment   At  School   In  the  Military  •  Title  IX     •  Female  soldier  is  more  likely   •  Academics,  sports,  harassment,   to  be  raped  by  a  fellow   STEM,  pregnancy     soldier  than  killed  by  enemy   a]ack.   At  Home  •  Homeless  Families  
  18. 18. •  Budget  Cuts/Recession  –  Impact  on  Funding   •  In  Georgia,  Governor  Nathan  Deal  proposed   $4.5  million  budget  cuts  for  domes@c  violence   shelters,  elimina@ng  state  funding.    Mary  Kay:    2012  Truth  About   •  In  Washington  state,  at  the  end  of  October  Abuse  Na@onal  Survey:   2011,  the  Department  of  Social  and  Health  •  8  out  of  10  domes@c   Services  no@fied  organiza@ons  with  domes@c   violence  shelters   na@onwide  reported  an   violence  programs  it  would  reduce  state  funds   increase  in  women   for  domes@c  violence  by  25  percent  January  1,   seeking  help.   2012,  and  another  50  percent  the  following  •  74%  of  women  stayed   with  an  abuser  longer  for   July  1.   economic  reasons.   •  In  Iowa,  “the  A]orney  General’s  office  says  •  58%  of  shelters  reported   federal  support  for  the  state’s  vic@m   that  the  abuse  is  more   violent  now  than  before   assistance  programs  has  dipped  by  $1.5  million   the  economic  downturn.   and  state  funding  has  gone  down  more  than  •  62%  of  survivors  could  not   $200,000  in  the  same  @me.   find  jobs  due  to  the   economy.   •  Gov  Nikki  Haley  –  cut  $400K  for  DV  and  rape  •  43%  of  shelters  had  to   crisis  centers  –  distrac@on  from  larger  public   decrease  services  offered.   health  issues  –  special  interest    
  19. 19. GENDER  LENS  Occupation Number of Employees Hourly median Wage Annual Median Wage* Percent of Standard**ALL OCCUPATIONS 5,091,490 $15.72 $32,706 71% Registered nurses 117,870 $28.76 $59,823 130% Office Clerks general 103,220 $12.68 $26,366 57% Cashiers 133,860 $8.36 $17,396 38% Waiters and Waitresses 92,700 $8.10 $16,831 36% Customer service representatives 80,650 $14.84 $30,867 67% Combined food Preparation and serving Workers 150,720 $8.08 $16,790 36% Including fast food Retail salespersons 146,360 $9.43 $19,626 43% Janitors and Cleaners except maids and 85,240 $10.52 $21,886 47% Housekeeping Cleaners Laborers and freight stock and material movers 108,010 $11.31 $23,530 51% Stock Clerks and Order fillers 75,810 $10.16 $21,146 46%THE ANNUAL SELF-SUFFICIENCY STANDARD FOR ONE ADULT, ONEPRESCHOOLER, AND ONE SCHOOL-AGE CHILD IN CUYAHOGA COUNTY $21.85 $46,141 100%
  20. 20. Applying  a  Gender  Lens   Number/of/ Hourly/median/ Annual/Median/ Percent/of/Occupation Employees Wage/ Wage*/ Standard**/All#Occupations# 5091490 15.72 32706 0.71Registered/nurses/ 117,870 $28.76/ $59,823/ 130%Office/Clerks/general/ 103,220 $12.68/ $26,366/ 57% 84%/FemaleCashiers/ 133,860 $8.36/ $17,396/ 38% 74%/FemaleWaiters/and/Waitresses/ 92,700 $8.10/ $16,831/ 36% 71%/FemaleCustomer/service/representatives/ 80,650 $14.84/ $30,867/ 67% 66%/FemaleCombined/food/Preparation/and/serving/ 150,720 $8.08/ $16,790/ 36% 55%/FemaleWorkers/Including/fast/food/Retail/salespersons/ 146,360 $9.43/ $19,626/ 43% 52%/FemaleJanitors#and#Cleaners#except#maids#and#Housekeeping#Cleaners# 85240 10.52 21886 47%Laborers#and#freight#stock#and#material#movers# 108010 11.31 23530 51%Stock#Clerks#and#Order#fillers# 75810 10.16 21146 46%Annual#Self#Sufficiency#Standard,#One#Adult,#One#PreIschooler,#Cuyahoga# $21.85# $46,141# 100%County
  21. 21. Poverty  Among  Women   Adults   Families   •  One  in  seven  women   •  40.9%  for  female-­‐headed   •  18  million  women  in  the  US   households     •  Six  in  10  poor  children  live  in  a   family  with  a  single  mom  
  22. 22. Poverty  Among  Women  Older  Women  
  23. 23. Minimum  Wage  Workers  Minimum  Wage  •  Women  are  48%   of  the  labor  force  •  Women   represent  nearly   33%   two-­‐thirds  of   minimum  wage   Women   workers  ($7.25)   Men  •  Women  are   nearly  two-­‐thirds   66%   of  workers  in   5pped   occupa5ons   (Min:  $2.13)    
  24. 24. WAGE  GAP  •  For  African  American   women,  the  gap  is  $. 64  •  For  Hispanic  women,   the  gap  is  $.55    At  least  40%  of  the  wage  gap  CANNOT  be  explained  by  differences  in  educa@on,  background,  experience  and  occupa@onal  choice    Wage  gap  begins  with  first  job  and  becomes  progressively  worse  as  women’s  careers  progress        
  25. 25. PAY  GAP  FOR  NEW  MBA  Grades   Yr Age Man Woman Diff Year Age Man Woman DiffMBA         1 41 $196,459 $185,544 $10,914          1 42 $206,282 $194,822 $11,460          1 43 $216,596 $204,563 $12,033          1 44 $227,426 $214,791 $12,635 1 25 $90,000 $85,000 $5,000 1 45 $238,797 $225,530 $13,266 1 26 $94,500 $89,250 $5,250 1 46 $250,737 $236,807 $13,930 1 27 $99,225 $93,713 $5,513 1 47 $263,273 $248,647 $14,626 1 28 $104,186 $98,398 $5,788 1 48 $276,437 $261,080 $15,358 1 29 $109,396 $103,318 $6,078 1 49 $290,259 $274,133 $16,125 1 30 $114,865 $108,484 $6,381 1 50 $304,772 $287,840 $16,932 1 31 $120,609 $113,908 $6,700 1 51 $320,011 $302,232 $17,778 1 32 $126,639 $119,604 $7,036 1 52 $336,011 $317,344 $18,667 1 33 $132,971 $125,584 $7,387 1 53 $352,812 $333,211 $19,601 1 34 $139,620 $131,863 $7,757 1 54 $370,452 $349,872 $20,581 1 35 $146,601 $138,456 $8,144 1 55 $388,975 $367,365 $21,610 1 36 $153,931 $145,379 $8,552 1 56 $408,424 $385,733 $22,690 1 37 $161,627 $152,648 $8,979 1 57 $428,845 $405,020 $23,825 1 38 $169,708 $160,280 $9,428 1 58 $450,287 $425,271 $25,016 1 39 $178,194 $168,294 $9,900 1 59 $472,801 $446,535 $26,267 1 40 $187,104 $176,709 $10,395 1 60 $496,441 $468,861 $27,580          36   $8,625,269 $8,146,087 $479,182
  26. 26. Pay  Gap  –  MBA  Grads  –  Two  Kids   Yr Age Man Woman Diff   Year Age Man Woman DiffMBA 2 kids half-the increase     1 41 $196,459 $176,814 $19,645            1 42 $206,282 $185,655 $20,627            1 43 $216,596 $194,938 $21,658            1 44 $227,426 $204,684 $22,741 1 25 $90,000 $85,000 $5,000   1 45 $238,797 $214,919 $23,878 1 26 $94,500 $89,250 $5,250   1 46 $250,737 $225,665 $25,072 1 27 $99,225 $93,713 $5,513   1 47 $263,273 $236,948 $26,326 1 28 $104,186 $98,398 $5,788   1 48 $276,437 $248,795 $27,642 1 29 $109,396 $103,318 $6,078   1 49 $290,259 $261,235 $29,024 1 30 $114,865 $108,484 $6,381   1 50 $304,772 $274,297 $30,475 1 31 $120,609 $113,908 $6,700   1 51 $320,011 $288,012 $31,999 1 32 $126,639  $119,604     $7,036   1 52 $336,011 $302,412 $33,599 1 33 $132,971 $122,594 $10,377 2.50% 1 53 $352,812 $317,533 $35,279 1 34 $139,620 $128,723 $10,896   1 54 $370,452 $333,409 $37,043 1 35 $146,601 $135,159 $11,441   1 55 $388,975 $350,080 $38,895 1 36 $153,931 $141,917 $12,013   1 56 $408,424 $367,584 $40,840 1 37 $161,627  $149,013     $12,614   1 57 $428,845 $385,963 $42,882 1 38 $169,708 $152,739 $16,970 2.50% 1 58 $450,287 $405,261 $45,026 1 39 $178,194 $160,376 $17,818   1 59 $472,801 $425,524 $47,277 1 40 $187,104 $168,394 $18,709   1 60 $496,441 $446,800 $49,641            36   $8,625,269 $7,817,116 $808,153
  27. 27. Women  Don’t  Ask  h]p://blogs-­‐images.forbes.com/brycecovert/files/2012/11/tribehr_payraise_infographic2.jpg  Women  Lack  Ambi@on  h]p://www.forbes.com/sites/brycecovert/2012/11/14/women-­‐arent-­‐held-­‐back-­‐by-­‐an-­‐ambi@on-­‐gap-­‐theyre-­‐just-­‐held-­‐back/  
  28. 28. EQUAL   $100,000 or 83% $75,000 to 74% $65,000 to 68%PAY   $55,000 to $50,000 to 65% 64%•  72%  of  full5me   $45,000 to 60% year-­‐round   $40,000 to 59% female  workers   $35,000 to 55% $30,000 to earn  less  than   51% $25,000 to 47% $50,000  a  year     $22,500 to 42%•  45%  of  full5me   $20,000 to 46% year-­‐round  male   $17,500 to 42% workers  earn   $15,000 to 41% $50,000  or  more   $12,500 to 38% a  year     $10,000 to 41% $7,500 to 41% $5,000 to 41% $2,500 to 42% $1 to $2,499 43% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
  29. 29. •  It  takes  four  or  more  years  of  college  (or  EDUCATIONAL   the  equivalent)  to  increase  the  median   earnings  of  women  in  Ohio  to  exceed  the  ATTAINMENT   median  earnings  of  men  with  a  high   school  diploma  ($36,911  vs.  $31,739)   23% Men  with  HS  Diploma:  $31,739   Women  with  HS  Diploma:  $20,821     Men  with  BA/BS:  $56,013   Women  with  BS/BA:  $36,911   Women In Ohio With Four or More Years •  Four  or  more  years  of  college  reduces   of College the  rate  of  poverty  among  women  from   14  %  to  3.9  %   •  For  African  American  women,  only  14%   have  four  or  more  years  of  college.  
  30. 30. Social  Security  benefits  are   Other  Issues   lower  for  women  than  for  men     •  The  average  Social  Security  benefit  for   Social  Security   women  65  and  older  is  about  $12,100  per  18000   $16K   year,  compared  to  about  $16,000  for  men  16000  14000   $12K   65  and  older.  12000  10000   8000   •  Sources:    Na@onal  Women’s  Law  Center   6000   4000   2000   0  
  31. 31. •  About  1,000  American-­‐born  children  Human   are  forced  into  the  sex  trade  in  Ohio  Trafficking   every  year  and  about  800  immigrants  h]p:// are  sexually  exploited  and  pushed  www.cleveland.com/na@on/index.ssf/2010/02/ into  sweatshop-­‐type  jobs,  a  new  ohio_is_hot_spot_in_hum report  on  human  trafficking  in  the  an_traf.html   state  said  Wednesday.   •  Ohios  weak  laws  on  human   trafficking,  its  growing  demand  for   cheap  labor  and  its  proximity  to  the   Canadian  border  are  key  contributors   to  the  illegal  ac@vity,  according  to  a   report  by  the  Trafficking  in  Persons   Study  Commission.  
  32. 32. •  Tougher  laws  HUMAN   •  Human  trafficking  is  now  in  Ohio’s  TRAFFICKING   criminal  code   •  Juvenile  offenders  are  directed  to   treatment  programs   •  Can  arrest  customers  paying  for   sex  with  minors  
  33. 33. •  Na@onal  Women’s  Law  Center   (nwlc.org)  (mul@ple  issues  RESOURCES   including  health  report  card)   •  Ins@tute  for  Women’s  Policy   Research  (iwpr.org)   •  Catalyst  (catalyst.org)   •  AAUW  (aauw.org)   •  Women’s  Sports  Founda@on   (womenssportsfounda@on.org)   •  NCAA  (ncaa.org)   •  Educa@on  Stats  (nces.ed.gov)  
  34. 34. •  Census/American  Community   Survey:    facuinder2.census.gov  •  The  Ins@tute  on  Women   (ins@tuteonwomen.org)  
  35. 35. Lede  (Around  a  news  hook)  The  Op-­‐Ed   Thesis  (Statement  of  argument  –  either  explicit  or  implied)   Argument:  Based  on  evidence  (such  as  stats,  news,  reports  from  credible  organiza5ons,  Project   expert  quotes,  scholarship,  history,  first-­‐hand  experience)   •  1st  Point   •  evidence  h]p:// •  evidence  www.theopedproject.org/ •  conclusion  index.php? •  2nd  Point  op@on=com_content&vie •  evidence  w=ar@cle&id=68&Itemid=8 •  evidence  0   •  conclusion   •  3rd  Point   •  evidence   •  evidence   •  conclusion     Note:  In  a  simple,  declara5ve  op-­‐ed  (“policy  X  is  bad;  here’s  why”)  ,  this  may  be   straighporward.  In  a  more  complex  commentary,  the  3rd  point  may  expand  on  the   bigger  picture—historical  context,  global/geographic  picture,  mythological   underpinnings,  etc.—or  may  offer  an  explana5on  for  a  mystery  that  underpins  the   argument–  eg.,  why  a  bad  policy  con5nues,  in  spite  of  its  failures.   “To  Be  Sure”  paragraph  (in  which  you  pre-­‐empt  your  poten5al  cri5cs  by  acknowledging   any  flaws  in  your  argument,  and  address  any  obvious  counter-­‐arguments.)   Conclusion  (oten  circling  back  to  your  lede)    

×