Periodic Reporting for period 4 - Struct. vs. Individ (The ‘Declining Significance of Gender’ Reexamined: Cross-Country Comparison of Individual and Structural Aspects of Gender Inequality)
Reporting period: 2022-01-01 to 2025-01-31
Optimistic voices regarding the future of the gender revolution rely on women’s advancement over recent decades in almost all areas of life in post-industrial societies. For example, women’s involvement in paid work has dramatically increased; the male-breadwinner model lost it prominence, and the amount of time devoted by women to paid work (relative to unpaid work) increased. Women have also surpassed men in rates of college graduation, and integrated into politics, and prestigious jobs in the labor market, particularly managerial and high-status professional occupations, which together have contributed to a convergence in gender pay gaps. These changes have been accompanied by shifts in legislation and public opinion towards a greater support for gender equality. Based on these outcomes, the optimistic conclusion is almost self-evident: when assessed by attainments of individual women, the significance of gender as a stratifying force has consistently declined over the last half-century.
Less optimistic perspectives, however, point to the slowdown and even stagnation of major aspects of this ‘gender revolution’ from the mid-1990s onwards. This shift is surprising given women’s continued gains in marketable resources, as described above. Explaining this situation, feminists point to structural mechanisms of gender inequality. They argue that despite the economic advancement of individual women, the ‘gender revolution’ did not succeed in eliminating deeply embedded gender beliefs about the fundamental differences between men and women in skill competence and abilities. These beliefs, they argue, not only (still) restrict women’s entry to certain fields of study and occupations, but also contribute to devaluing women’s skills; legitimize lower economic reward for jobs and activities dominated by women; preserve a disproportionate amount of time spent by women on unpaid work; and cause gender blindness in research and gender bias in hiring, wage determination and pay. All these factors create bottlenecks hindering the further advancement of gender equality.
Motivated by these opposing processes, the aim of the project was to identify these bottlenecks, which we argue serve as ‘structural barriers’ preventing individual women from competing successfully against men for resources and rewards. We argue that as more women become integrated into positions of power, the more influential the role of these structural barriers is likely to become. However, because these are less amenable to empirical assessment, they are under-researched compared to individual aspects, and are frequently assumed to be gender-neutral. The implications are that the significance of gender as a determinant of economic inequality in the labor market is insufficiently acknowledged, as is our ability to evaluate its evolving role in society. Thus, all studies of the project highlight the importance of these structural factors, in the public as well as the private sphere, by developing this analytical framework, and by providing empirical evidence of it.
Less optimistic perspectives, however, point to the slowdown and even stagnation of major aspects of this ‘gender revolution’ from the mid-1990s onwards. This shift is surprising given women’s continued gains in marketable resources, as described above. Explaining this situation, feminists point to structural mechanisms of gender inequality. They argue that despite the economic advancement of individual women, the ‘gender revolution’ did not succeed in eliminating deeply embedded gender beliefs about the fundamental differences between men and women in skill competence and abilities. These beliefs, they argue, not only (still) restrict women’s entry to certain fields of study and occupations, but also contribute to devaluing women’s skills; legitimize lower economic reward for jobs and activities dominated by women; preserve a disproportionate amount of time spent by women on unpaid work; and cause gender blindness in research and gender bias in hiring, wage determination and pay. All these factors create bottlenecks hindering the further advancement of gender equality.
Motivated by these opposing processes, the aim of the project was to identify these bottlenecks, which we argue serve as ‘structural barriers’ preventing individual women from competing successfully against men for resources and rewards. We argue that as more women become integrated into positions of power, the more influential the role of these structural barriers is likely to become. However, because these are less amenable to empirical assessment, they are under-researched compared to individual aspects, and are frequently assumed to be gender-neutral. The implications are that the significance of gender as a determinant of economic inequality in the labor market is insufficiently acknowledged, as is our ability to evaluate its evolving role in society. Thus, all studies of the project highlight the importance of these structural factors, in the public as well as the private sphere, by developing this analytical framework, and by providing empirical evidence of it.
Working to achieve the project’s objectives our team has published 12 peer-reviewed papers - all in top-ranked academic journals (Q1) in the fields of Sociology, Demography, Economics, Education, Women's studies and Political Science. An additional publication is currently awaiting publication as a chapter in the OUP Stratification Handbook, Another has been conditionally accepted in RSSM (Q1 journal) and two more papers are in production.
The main results of the project are categorized below in four overarching branches of research.
The first of these branches explores structural elements of the economy which counter women's individual advancement. All works in this branch utilize and analyze large datasets within a comparative perspective (between countries or across time.) The first article, published in Demography (2018) examines the relation between occupational feminization (an increase in the percent of women in an occupation), and the devaluation of the occupation’s value (a decrease in its average pay). It demonstrates how the increasing educational attainments of women and their entry into professional occupations in the United States since the 1960s, has offset and thus concealed the increasing devaluation of occupations with higher percentage of women (structural aspect of gender inequality). A second paper in a similar vein, published in Research in Social Stratification and Mobility (RSSM 2021), examines the extent to which employment in the public sector vs. private sector attracts and rewards subgroups (classified by race and gender) differently. A third paper in this branch was published in Sociological Science (2022). The paper shows that the rapid increase of earnings at the top of the pay distribution (structural force), coupled with the (persisting) underrepresentation of women in these positions (compositional force), is highly consequential for the persistence of the gender pay gap. A paper published in RSSM (2024) demonstrates that globalization, as a structural force, has a complex effect on gender inequality. On the one hand, it prompts women to enter gainful employment. On the other hand, it encourages men and women to choose gender-typical career paths, leading to higher occupational segregation. Finally, the chapter in the OUP Stratification Handbook, summarizes the various dimensions of gender inequality – its individual and structural mechanisms - that initially propelled the “revolution,” and those that later inhibited its progress.
The second strand of the project focuses on gender gaps in the wage premium earned on human capital characteristics (measured as education and work experience). Specifically, it conceptualized these premiums as structural and gendered, rather than based on gender-neutral "market forces", as classical economic theories assume. The first such paper, published in Demography (2021), shows that although women attain higher levels of academic education than men, they receive lower economic returns on their degrees across the entire distribution (structural force). Furthermore, this gender gap increases at the top education premiums and in later years. The second paper, published in Social Indicators Research (2023), similarly shows that the key to understanding the persistence of gender pay gap lies not in the different human capital characteristics of men and women, but in the fact that women are rewarded less than men for their skills (education as well as work experience).
The third strand of the project explores cultural gender biases and “gender blindness,” which is a significant element of the gendered structure that affects gender pay inequality. A paper published in Politics & Gender (2023) demonstrates how gender blindness, as a hidden structural force, biases results and impedes our understanding of basic political science outcomes. A paper published in Studies in Higher Education (2024) finds that a policy of state-mandated gender quotas - a policy that targets gender biases - is effective in increasing greater equality in (senior) academia, with only little evidence of backlash. Third in this strand is a paper published in Feminist Economics (2024) that demonstrates how gendered preconceptions of “women’s work,” embedded in a “market-based logic,” can seep into an organization through a shift in the ostensibly gender neutral wage determination system and increase gender inequality. Finally, in a paper forthcoming (conditional acceptance) in RSSM we show how and why the literature on the economic value of education failed to acknowledge women’s lower education premiums, as well as the rise in gender inequality in education premiums over-time.
Our fourth and final strand of the project focuses on the gender gap in unpaid work – another socio-cultural structural force hindering women's advancement. The three papers included under this subject (published in the European Sociological Review (2020), Sex Roles (2021) (2024)) provide empirical evidence (by comparisons between countries, time periods, or between groups) that supports and validates the theoretical explanatory power of gender-cultural mechanism (over economic based mechanisms which relay on individual mechanisms).
The main results of the project are categorized below in four overarching branches of research.
The first of these branches explores structural elements of the economy which counter women's individual advancement. All works in this branch utilize and analyze large datasets within a comparative perspective (between countries or across time.) The first article, published in Demography (2018) examines the relation between occupational feminization (an increase in the percent of women in an occupation), and the devaluation of the occupation’s value (a decrease in its average pay). It demonstrates how the increasing educational attainments of women and their entry into professional occupations in the United States since the 1960s, has offset and thus concealed the increasing devaluation of occupations with higher percentage of women (structural aspect of gender inequality). A second paper in a similar vein, published in Research in Social Stratification and Mobility (RSSM 2021), examines the extent to which employment in the public sector vs. private sector attracts and rewards subgroups (classified by race and gender) differently. A third paper in this branch was published in Sociological Science (2022). The paper shows that the rapid increase of earnings at the top of the pay distribution (structural force), coupled with the (persisting) underrepresentation of women in these positions (compositional force), is highly consequential for the persistence of the gender pay gap. A paper published in RSSM (2024) demonstrates that globalization, as a structural force, has a complex effect on gender inequality. On the one hand, it prompts women to enter gainful employment. On the other hand, it encourages men and women to choose gender-typical career paths, leading to higher occupational segregation. Finally, the chapter in the OUP Stratification Handbook, summarizes the various dimensions of gender inequality – its individual and structural mechanisms - that initially propelled the “revolution,” and those that later inhibited its progress.
The second strand of the project focuses on gender gaps in the wage premium earned on human capital characteristics (measured as education and work experience). Specifically, it conceptualized these premiums as structural and gendered, rather than based on gender-neutral "market forces", as classical economic theories assume. The first such paper, published in Demography (2021), shows that although women attain higher levels of academic education than men, they receive lower economic returns on their degrees across the entire distribution (structural force). Furthermore, this gender gap increases at the top education premiums and in later years. The second paper, published in Social Indicators Research (2023), similarly shows that the key to understanding the persistence of gender pay gap lies not in the different human capital characteristics of men and women, but in the fact that women are rewarded less than men for their skills (education as well as work experience).
The third strand of the project explores cultural gender biases and “gender blindness,” which is a significant element of the gendered structure that affects gender pay inequality. A paper published in Politics & Gender (2023) demonstrates how gender blindness, as a hidden structural force, biases results and impedes our understanding of basic political science outcomes. A paper published in Studies in Higher Education (2024) finds that a policy of state-mandated gender quotas - a policy that targets gender biases - is effective in increasing greater equality in (senior) academia, with only little evidence of backlash. Third in this strand is a paper published in Feminist Economics (2024) that demonstrates how gendered preconceptions of “women’s work,” embedded in a “market-based logic,” can seep into an organization through a shift in the ostensibly gender neutral wage determination system and increase gender inequality. Finally, in a paper forthcoming (conditional acceptance) in RSSM we show how and why the literature on the economic value of education failed to acknowledge women’s lower education premiums, as well as the rise in gender inequality in education premiums over-time.
Our fourth and final strand of the project focuses on the gender gap in unpaid work – another socio-cultural structural force hindering women's advancement. The three papers included under this subject (published in the European Sociological Review (2020), Sex Roles (2021) (2024)) provide empirical evidence (by comparisons between countries, time periods, or between groups) that supports and validates the theoretical explanatory power of gender-cultural mechanism (over economic based mechanisms which relay on individual mechanisms).
The literature addressing gender inequality in general, and wage inequality in particular, identifies the wage structure (as well as organizational or societal structures) as an influential factor. The prevalent view is that gender gaps are related both to individual factors and to factors associated with the "structure," with the latter considered gender-neutral. Our work challenges the view that wage, organizational, or societal structures are gender-neutral by tracking long-term changes in manifestations of "structure" within both public and private arenas. Throughout the publications of the project we have shown that many attributes of the “structure” are in fact gendered and are becoming more impactful over the last few. These theoretical and empirical advances deepen our understanding of the sources of gender inequality, and hopefully edge us closer to better policy solutions for this persistent social problem.