nep-gen New Economics Papers
on Gender
Issue of 2018‒12‒17
six papers chosen by
Jan Sauermann
Stockholms universitet

  1. Gender Differences in Sabotage: The Role of Uncertainty and Beliefs By Simon Dato; Petra Nieken
  2. Do Electoral Rules Matter for Female Representation? By Paola Profeta; Eleanor Woodhouse
  3. Women in Economics: Stalled Progress By Shelly Lundberg; Jenna Stearns
  4. Globalization, Gender, and the Family By Keller, Wolfgang; Utar, Hale
  5. Motherhood and the Gender Productivity Gap By Yana Gallen
  6. Occupational Match Quality and Gender over Two Cohorts By John T. Addison; Liwen Chen; Orgul D. Ozturk

  1. By: Simon Dato; Petra Nieken
    Abstract: We study gender differences in relation to performance and sabotage in competitions. While we find no systematic gender differences in performance in the real effort task, we observe a strong gender gap in sabotage choices in our experiment. This gap is rooted in the uncertainty about the opponent's sabotage: in the absence of information about the opponent's sabotage choice, males expect to suffer from sabotage to a higher degree than females and choose higher sabotage levels themselves. If beliefs are exogenously aligned by implementing sabotage via strategy method, the gender gap in sabotage choices disappears. Moreover, providing a noisy signal about the sabotage level from which subjects might suffer leads to an endogenous alignment of beliefs and eliminates the gender gap in sabotage.
    Keywords: gender, sabotage, tournament, belief formation
    JEL: J16 M12 C91
    Date: 2018
  2. By: Paola Profeta; Eleanor Woodhouse
    Abstract: How do electoral rules affect the representation of women? We collect panel data on the universe of Italian politicians from all levels of government over the period 1987-2013 and obtain a complete picture of the career paths of male and female politicians across the whole arc of their careers in public office. We use our unique dataset to analyse the effects on female political representation of an Italian reform which, in 2005, changed the electoral rule for national elections from (mostly) majoritarian to proportional, but did not affect sub-national level elections. We find that proportional electoral rules favour the election of women. We propose a new channel through which this result is obtained, related to the different nature of political competition in the two electoral systems: under proportional rules, parties place women less frequently in competitive seats. This is consistent with the fact that proportional systems value gender diversity more than majoritarian ones, while majoritarian systems rely on head-to-head electoral races, which are not gender neutral. We also find that electoral rules have weaker effects on female representation in geographical areas where traditional gender roles are dominant.
    Keywords: Electoral reforms; Majoritarian; Proportional; Electoral Competition; Political Selection, Difference-in-Differences
    Date: 2018–06
  3. By: Shelly Lundberg (University of California Santa Barbara); Jenna Stearns (University of California, Santa Barbara)
    Abstract: In this paper, we first document trends in the gender composition of academic economists over the past 25 years, the extent to which these trends encompass the most elite departments, and how women’s representation across fields of study within economics has changed. We then review the recent literature on other dimensions of women’s relative position in the discipline, including research productivity and income, and assess evidence on the barriers that female economists face in publishing, promotion, and tenure. While underlying gender differences can directly affect the relative productivity of men and women, due to either differential constraints or preferences, productivity gaps do not fully explain the gender disparity in promotion rates in economics. Furthermore, the progress of women has stalled relative to that in other disciplines in the past two decades. We propose that differential assessment of men and women is one important factor in explaining this stalled progress, reflected in gendered institutional policies and apparent implicit bias in promotion and editorial review processes.
    Keywords: gender, economics, tenure and promotion practices, promotion, tenure, publishing
    JEL: J16 J71 J21
    Date: 2018–12
  4. By: Keller, Wolfgang; Utar, Hale
    Abstract: This paper shows that globalization has far-reaching implications for the economy's fertility rate and family structure because they influence work-life balance. Employing population register data on new births, marriages, and divorces together with employer-employee linked data for Denmark, we show that lower labor market opportunities due to Chinese import competition lead to a shift towards family, with more parental leave taking and higher fertility as well as more marriages and fewer divorces. This pro-family, pro-child shift is driven largely by women, not men. Correspondingly, the negative earnings implications of the rising import competition are concentrated on women, and gender earnings inequality increases. We show that the choice of market versus family is a major determinant of worker adjustment costs to labor market shocks. While older workers respond to the shock rather similarly whether female or not, for young workers the fertility response takes away the adjustment advantage they typically have-if the worker is a woman. We find that the female biological clock-women have difficulties to conceive beyond their early forties-is central for the gender differential, rather than the composition of jobs and workplaces, as well as other potential causes.
    Keywords: Divorce; Earnings Inequality; Fertility; Gender Gap; import competition; Marriage
    JEL: F16 J12 J13 J16
    Date: 2018–11
  5. By: Yana Gallen (Harris School of Public Policy)
    Abstract: Using Danish matched employer-employee data, I compare the relative pay of men and women to their relative productivity as measured by production function estimation. I find that the gender “productivity gap” is 8 percent, implying that almost two thirds of the residual gender wage gap is due to productivity differences between men and women. Motherhood plays an important role, yet it also reveals a puzzle: the pay gap for mothers is entirely explained by productivity, whereas the gap for non-mothers is not. In addition, the decoupling of pay and productivity for women without children happens during their prime-child bearing years. These estimates are robust to a variety of specifications for the impact of observables on productivity, and robust to accounting for endogenous sorting of women into less productive firms using a control-function approach. This paper also provides estimates of the productivity gap across industries and occupations, finding the same general patterns for mothers compared to women without children within these subgroups.
    Keywords: discrimination, wage gap, Labor Productivity
    JEL: J71 J24 J31
    Date: 2018–12
  6. By: John T. Addison; Liwen Chen; Orgul D. Ozturk
    Abstract: Using a multi-dimensional measure of occupational mismatch, we report distinct gender differences in match quality and changes in match quality over the course of careers. A substantial portion of the gender wage gap stems from match quality differences among more educated individuals. College-educated females are significantly more mismatched than males. Individuals with children and in more flexible occupations also tend to be more mismatched. Again, this is especially true of women. Cohort effects are also discernible: college-educated males of the younger cohort have lower match quality than the older cohort, even as the new generation of women is doing better.
    Keywords: multidimensional skills, occupational mismatch, match quality, wages, gender wage gap, fertility, fertility timing
    JEL: J13 J16 J22 J23 J24 J31 J33 J38
    Date: 2018

This nep-gen issue is ©2018 by Jan Sauermann. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.