女孩上学很重要,但不足以促进男孩和女孩在童年和整个生命过程中的平等

IF 2 3区 经济学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Development Policy Review Pub Date : 2023-08-04 DOI:10.1111/dpr.12738
Chris Desmond, Kathryn Watt, Sara Naicker, Jere Behrman, Linda Richter
{"title":"女孩上学很重要,但不足以促进男孩和女孩在童年和整个生命过程中的平等","authors":"Chris Desmond,&nbsp;Kathryn Watt,&nbsp;Sara Naicker,&nbsp;Jere Behrman,&nbsp;Linda Richter","doi":"10.1111/dpr.12738","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Motivation</h3>\n \n <p>Investing in girls' schooling in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is seen as central to improving gender equity. It is argued that interventions to promote girls' enrolment are appropriate as girls face gendered barriers to school enrolment and completion and investing in girls' schooling has high economic and human development returns. But is this fair to boys and enough for girls?</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>We ask how appropriate it is to direct development assistance towards improving girls' school enrolment, compared to prioritizing schooling for both girls and boys, and addressing barriers to gender equality throughout the life course.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\n \n <p>We frame the enquiry through a human development framework with three distinct but interdependent domains: protection of human development potential; realization of human development potential; and use of human development potential.</p>\n \n <p>Using publicly available data, we identify indicators that are likely to be correlated with the degree to which human development potential is protected, realized, and utilized in LMICs. We compare male and female outcomes on each of these indicators to assess gender parity at different life stages.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>In most regions, girls are ahead of boys in both school enrolment and completion. Girls have better outcomes than boys in several other indicators in early life and childhood.</p>\n \n <p>In adolescence and adulthood, girls and women fall behind boys and men. This is especially apparent in workforce participation, in unemployment, in pay, and in share of unpaid care work and political participation, where women have less favourable outcomes than men. The bias against women is most marked in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>A focus on girls' schooling should be tempered by ensuring quality pre-primary, primary, and secondary schooling for both boys and girls. At the same time, we must address causes of gender inequality, including labour market discrimination and social norms that justify the exclusion and exploitation of women and girls.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51478,"journal":{"name":"Development Policy Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.12738","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Girls' schooling is important but insufficient to promote equality for boys and girls in childhood and across the life course\",\"authors\":\"Chris Desmond,&nbsp;Kathryn Watt,&nbsp;Sara Naicker,&nbsp;Jere Behrman,&nbsp;Linda Richter\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dpr.12738\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Motivation</h3>\\n \\n <p>Investing in girls' schooling in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is seen as central to improving gender equity. It is argued that interventions to promote girls' enrolment are appropriate as girls face gendered barriers to school enrolment and completion and investing in girls' schooling has high economic and human development returns. But is this fair to boys and enough for girls?</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>We ask how appropriate it is to direct development assistance towards improving girls' school enrolment, compared to prioritizing schooling for both girls and boys, and addressing barriers to gender equality throughout the life course.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\\n \\n <p>We frame the enquiry through a human development framework with three distinct but interdependent domains: protection of human development potential; realization of human development potential; and use of human development potential.</p>\\n \\n <p>Using publicly available data, we identify indicators that are likely to be correlated with the degree to which human development potential is protected, realized, and utilized in LMICs. We compare male and female outcomes on each of these indicators to assess gender parity at different life stages.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>In most regions, girls are ahead of boys in both school enrolment and completion. Girls have better outcomes than boys in several other indicators in early life and childhood.</p>\\n \\n <p>In adolescence and adulthood, girls and women fall behind boys and men. This is especially apparent in workforce participation, in unemployment, in pay, and in share of unpaid care work and political participation, where women have less favourable outcomes than men. The bias against women is most marked in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>A focus on girls' schooling should be tempered by ensuring quality pre-primary, primary, and secondary schooling for both boys and girls. At the same time, we must address causes of gender inequality, including labour market discrimination and social norms that justify the exclusion and exploitation of women and girls.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.12738\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12738\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12738","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs),投资于女童教育被视为改善性别平等的关键。本文认为,促进女童入学的干预措施是适当的,因为女童在入学和完成学业方面面临性别障碍,而对女童入学的投资具有很高的经济和人类发展回报。但这对男孩公平,对女孩足够吗?我们想知道,将发展援助直接用于提高女童入学率,与优先为女童和男童提供教育、消除终身性别平等障碍相比,是否更合适。我们通过具有三个不同但相互依存领域的人类发展框架来构建调查:保护人类发展潜力;实现人的发展潜力;利用人类发展潜力。利用可公开获得的数据,我们确定了可能与中低收入国家人类发展潜力得到保护、实现和利用程度相关的指标。我们比较了男性和女性在这些指标上的结果,以评估不同人生阶段的性别平等。在大多数地区,女孩在入学率和结业率方面都领先于男孩。在生命早期和儿童期的其他几个指标上,女孩的结果优于男孩。在青春期和成年期,女孩和妇女落后于男孩和男子。这在劳动力参与、失业、薪酬、无偿护理工作的份额和政治参与方面尤其明显,女性在这些方面的结果不如男性有利。对妇女的偏见在南亚和撒哈拉以南非洲最为明显。应通过确保男童和女童的优质学前、小学和中学教育来缓和对女童教育的关注。同时,我们必须解决性别不平等的原因,包括劳动力市场歧视和为排斥和剥削妇女和女孩辩护的社会规范。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Girls' schooling is important but insufficient to promote equality for boys and girls in childhood and across the life course

Motivation

Investing in girls' schooling in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is seen as central to improving gender equity. It is argued that interventions to promote girls' enrolment are appropriate as girls face gendered barriers to school enrolment and completion and investing in girls' schooling has high economic and human development returns. But is this fair to boys and enough for girls?

Purpose

We ask how appropriate it is to direct development assistance towards improving girls' school enrolment, compared to prioritizing schooling for both girls and boys, and addressing barriers to gender equality throughout the life course.

Methods and approach

We frame the enquiry through a human development framework with three distinct but interdependent domains: protection of human development potential; realization of human development potential; and use of human development potential.

Using publicly available data, we identify indicators that are likely to be correlated with the degree to which human development potential is protected, realized, and utilized in LMICs. We compare male and female outcomes on each of these indicators to assess gender parity at different life stages.

Findings

In most regions, girls are ahead of boys in both school enrolment and completion. Girls have better outcomes than boys in several other indicators in early life and childhood.

In adolescence and adulthood, girls and women fall behind boys and men. This is especially apparent in workforce participation, in unemployment, in pay, and in share of unpaid care work and political participation, where women have less favourable outcomes than men. The bias against women is most marked in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

Policy implications

A focus on girls' schooling should be tempered by ensuring quality pre-primary, primary, and secondary schooling for both boys and girls. At the same time, we must address causes of gender inequality, including labour market discrimination and social norms that justify the exclusion and exploitation of women and girls.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Development Policy Review
Development Policy Review DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Development Policy Review is the refereed journal that makes the crucial links between research and policy in international development. Edited by staff of the Overseas Development Institute, the London-based think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues, it publishes single articles and theme issues on topics at the forefront of current development policy debate. Coverage includes the latest thinking and research on poverty-reduction strategies, inequality and social exclusion, property rights and sustainable livelihoods, globalisation in trade and finance, and the reform of global governance. Informed, rigorous, multi-disciplinary and up-to-the-minute, DPR is an indispensable tool for development researchers and practitioners alike.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Assessing the success of National Human Rights Action Plans from a political economy perspective: The case of Chile Reshaping gender norms: Exploring the ripple effect of refugeeism on women's empowerment Does subsidizing seed help farmers? Nepal's rice seed subsidies Social sustainability discourse in cohesion policy: A critical review of Interreg Europe 2021–2027
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1