Last week a friend recommended the Our World in Data site. The mission of this page is to share research and data related to the world’s biggest problems, such as poverty, hunger, climate change and inequality.

One of the research about women and work analyses what determines the participation of women in economy. I’m not surprised to read that unpaid care work is one of the most decisive variables.

In almost every country in the world, men are more likely to participate in labour markets than women. The good news is that this gender gap has been dwindling substantially over the past 50 years.

It is important to first conceptualize the context to be able understand these changes. For women to participate in the labor market, the women must first have the time and opportunity to do so. Looking broadly at women’s time occupancy, it is noted that, around the world, women tend to do more activities in unpaid works, which fall outside the limits of the traditional economic production.

Women spend 3 to 6 hours per day in unpaid work, approximately, while men spend between 0.5 and 2 hours in these activities. If we add up unpaid work and paid work, women tend to work more than men, on average 2.6 overtime hours per week.

The following graphic shows these ratios.

So, it isn’t surprising that the factors that drive the change in job participation are improvements in maternal health, reduction in the number of children, provision of child care or improvements in home technology. Because time occupation is gender-related, women’s participation tends to increase when the time and cost of unpaid work is reduced, shared with men, or becomes more compatible with the labor market.

This analysis doesn’t attempt to give less significance to unpaid care work, as it is essential, but separate, from economic activities, and the fact that it is omitted from country statistics is a point of debate.

Anyway, the question is: Why do women do a disproportionate amount of unpaid care work? Although the use of time should be a choice, the evidence shows that social norms play a very important role in determining gender roles, and consequently time use.

Some argue that there is a natural distribution of gender roles: women are better suited for household chores and child-related responsibilities, while men are better suited to work outside the home. These arguments have no evidence and also perpetuate the status quo that limits the choices of both men and women. Instead, it is known that social norms and culture influence the way we see the world and our role in it. Therefore, there is very little doubt that gender roles have been built socially.

These social norms could originate in plowed farming-based cultures, and may have been perpetrated with some more modern labor restrictions, such as the labor ban for married women in the United States.

But even after these restrictions were cancelled and legal protections were implemented, discrimination and prejudice persist until now. For example, we can see the impact blind audition had on orchestras. Research by Goldin and Rouse shows that using a screen to hide the identity of candidates, increased the number of women in orchestras by 25% between 1970 and 1996.

So, how do we change those rules? Research in this area shows that intergenerational learning processes, exposure to alternative standards, and women’s activism movements can influence these standards.

It isn’t hope that generates change, but the change that generates hope. I believe that the first step is to begin, or rather, continue this conversation, challenge our own beliefs, and find new models, based on family needs and possibilities.

Photo by Alexander Dummer on Unsplash

ENG