“Why Call It Equality?” Revisited: An Extended Critique of the EIGE Gender Equality Index
-
Published:2023-05-27
Issue:1-3
Volume:168
Page:389-408
-
ISSN:0303-8300
-
Container-title:Social Indicators Research
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Soc Indic Res
Author:
Schmid Caitlin B.ORCID, Elliot MarkORCID
Abstract
AbstractIn this paper, we review the methodology of one of the most comprehensive indices of gender equality, the Gender Equality Index by the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE). Building on Permanyer’s (J Eur Soc Policy, 25(4):414–430, 2015) critical analysis, we offer an extended critique of the EIGE’s current methodology, focusing on four interrelated issues: (a) the lack of transparency around the methodological decisions and the concomitant implicit theorising, (b) the continuing over-contribution of the ‘correcting coefficient’ to the index such that it predominantly captures achievement levels rather than gender gaps, (c) problems with the verification process and use of Principal Component Analysis, (d) issues arising from the aggregation and weighting of index components. Our analysis shows that in addition to the use of the correcting coefficient, other methodological choices (such as the use of ratios and geometric means) result in an unjustified penalisation of lower-GDP countries, reinforcing biased assumptions about gender equality progress in more affluent countries vis-á-vis lower-GDP countries in the sample. We call for greater transparency around theory, method and the relationship between the two while also proposing methodological improvements. These changes would bring the EIGE index closer to fulfilling its undoubted potential to provide a nuanced understanding of gender equality levels in the European Union and effectively inform policy development toward social change.
Funder
Economic and Social Research Council
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Developmental and Educational Psychology
Reference39 articles.
1. Barbieri, D., Karu, M., Lestón, I. R., Mollard, B., Reingardė, J. (2017). Gender Equality Index 2017—Methodological Report. Tech. rep., Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://doi.org/10.2839/3514. 2. Barbieri, D., Caisl, J., Carpentier, S., Ciacchella, D., Karu, M., Mollard, B., Salanauskaitė, L. (2019). Gender Equality Index 2019 Work-life balance. Tech. rep., European Institute for Gender Equality, Luxembourg, https://doi.org/10.2839/44985, https://eige.europa.eu/publications/gender-equality-index-2019-work-life-balance. 3. Barbieri, D., Caisl, J., Karu, M., Lanfredi, G., Mollard, B., Peciukonis, V., Belen Pilares La Hoz, M., Reingardė, J., Salanauskaitė, L. (2020). Gender Equality Index 2020 Digitalisation and the future of work. Tech. rep., European Institute for Gender Equality, https://doi.org/10.2839/79077. 4. Bardhan, K., & Klasen, S. (1999). UNDP’s gender-related indices: A critical review. World Development, 27(6), 985–1010. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(99)00035-2 5. Bericat, E. (2012). The European Gender Equality Index: Conceptual and analytical issues. Social Indicators Research, 108(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9872-z
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|