Gender-based Economic Inequalities: A Review of Selected Concepts

Öz

Economic inequality is a global phenomenon with all-encompassing implications. While inequality affects both men and women, due to the socially ascribed gender roles and expectations women are more prone to experience disparities. Based on a narrative review, the aim of this article is to provide a primer on four selected theories related to genderbased economic inequalities. The first section provides a brief overview of a) sexual division of labor b) the nimble fingers theory c) glass wall and glass ceiling effects and d) female-headed households and the feminization of poverty. The final section demonstrates the implications of these paradoxical economic phenomena in the Turkish context. The article explains how women from diverse socio-economic backgrounds are prone to labor market inequalities because of the intricate nature of structural biases. A plethora of literature is available on the Turkish context, highlighting the nuances of economic participation. The present article complements the existing body of literature, however, it adds a new dimension by offering the theoretical underpinnings behind the economic inequalities endured by Turkish women. Future research could explore the empirical evidence on the dynamics of economic disparity while considering the theoretical concepts discussed in this article.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Economic Sociology,Inequalities,Turkey,Women’s Studies

Kaynakça

1. Arulampalam, W., Booth, A. L., & Bryan, M. L. (2007). Is there a glass ceiling over Europe? Exploring the gender pay gap across the wage distribution. ILR Review, 60(2), 163–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/001979390706000201
2. Atik, H., & Khan, M. (2016). Performance assessment of African countries in relation to women’s development. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, (47), 1–11. Retrieved from http://dergipark. gov.tr/erciyesiibd/issue/28009/297418
3. Atkinson, A. B. (2014). After Piketty? The British Journal of Sociology, 65(4), 619–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/14684446.12105
4. Baker, J. D. (2016). The purpose, process, and methods of writing a literature review. AORN Journal, 103(3), 265– 269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2016.01.016
5. Bakirci, K. (2010). Gender equality in employment in Turkish legislation with comparisons to EU and international law. J. Workplace Rights, 15(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.2190/WR.15.1.b
6. Barron, R. D., & Norris, G. M. (1991). Sexual divisions and the dual labour market. In Sexual Divisions Revisited (pp. 153–177). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21191-3_7
7. Benería, L. (1979). Reproduction, production and the sexual division of labour. Cambridge Journal of Economics (Vol. 3). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035421
8. Bhatasara, S., & Chiweshe, M. K. (2017). Beyond gender: Interrogating women’s experiences in FTLRP in Zimbabwe. Africa Review, 9(2), 154–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/09744053.2017.1329808

9. Cansiz, M., & Tekneci, P. D. (2018). Innovative and technology-based women entrepreneurs in Turkey: Capital and performance. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 57, 151–183. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS372449
10. Chant, S. (2006). Re-thinking the “feminisation of poverty” in relation to aggregate gender indices. Journal of Human Development, 7(2), 201–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880600768538
11. Cotter, D. A., Hermsen, J. M., Ovadia, S., & Vanneman, R. (2001). The glass ceiling effect. Social Forces, 80(2), 655–681. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2001.0091
12. Ecevit, Y. (2005). Shop floor control: The ideological construction of Turkish women factory workers. In M. T. S. Nanneke Redclift, M Thea Sinclair (Ed.), Working Women International Perspectives on Labour and Gender Ideology (pp. 65–88). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203975930-9
13. Ecevit, Y. (2007). A critical approach to women’s entrepreneurship in Turkey. ILO. Retrieved from www.ilo.org/ publns
14. Elson, D. (1996). Appraising recent developments in the world market for nimble fingers. In Confronting State, Capital and Patriarchy (pp. 35–55). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-34924450-8_2
15. Engels, F. (2004). The origin of the family, private property and the state introduction by Pat Brewer 4 the origin of the family, private property and the state. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/ 33598537/EngelsOrigin.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1553871893&Sign ature=t6tLQSmBtjhW1lOdqFpT5X8v%2F1M%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B filename%3D The_Origin_of_the_Family_Privat
16. G20-Turkey. (2014). G20 employment plan 2014 - Turkey. Retrieved from http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/2014/g20_ employment_plan_turkey.pdf
17. Gender-GEDI. (2015). The gender global entrepreneurship and development index (GEDI). Retrieved from www. dell.com/women
18. Güneş, P. M. (2016). The impact of female education on teenage fertility: Evidence from Turkey. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 16(1), 259–288. https://doi.org/10.1515/bejeap-2015-0059
19. Hakim, C. (1992). Explaining trends in occupational segregation: The measurement, causes, and consequences of the sexual division of labour. European Sociological Review, 8(2), 127–152. https://doi.org/10.1093/ oxfordjournals.esr.a036628
20. İlkkaracan, İ. (2012). Why so few women in the labor market in Turkey? Feminist Economics, 18(1), 1–37. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2011.649358
21. İlkkaracan, I., Kim, K., & Kaya, T. (2015). The impact of public investment in social care services on employment, gender equality, and poverty: The Turkish case. Retrieved from www.kaum.edu.tr
22. Ilkkaracan, I., & Selim, R. (2007). The gender wage gap in the Turkish labor market. Labour, 21(3), 563–593. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9914.2007.00378.x
23. Karshenas, M., & Moghadam, V. (2004). Female labor force participation and economic adjustment in the MENA region. Research in Middle East Economics, 4, 51–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1094-5334(01)04006-7
24. Khan, M. (2011). Illusions of motherhood: Assertions and realities of care work: A study on child care options for service holder women in Dhaka City: Amazon.co.uk: Masreka Khan, Soma Dey: 9783844392517: Books (1st ed.). Lambert.
25. Khan, M. (2013). Livelihood, shocks and survival: Women’ s livelihood strategy in relation to cyclonic hazard mitigation. Bangladesh Environmental Network Special Issue, 137–145.
26. Khan, M. (2016). Implications of citizenship discourse on female labour force participation: A case study of Bangladeshi women in the UK. In N. Mahtab & A. Sabur (Eds.), Discourse Analysis as a Tool for Understanding Gender Identity, Representation, and Equality (1 st, pp. 1–25). Pennsylvania: IGI Global. https://doi.org/ 10.4018/978-1-5225-0225-8.ch002
27. Khan, M., & Atik, H. (2016). Women’s relative development in Africa: A performance assessment on selected indicators. In 59th Annual Meeting of African Studies Association. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/ abstract=2750418
28. Khan, M., & Atik, H. (2019). Two tier development: Women in Africa. Journal of International Women’s Studies (JIWS), 20(7), 72–89.
29. Lansky, M., Ghosh, J., Meda, D., & Rani, U. (2017). Women, gender and work social choices and inequalities volume 2 (D. M. and U. R. Mark Lansky, Jayati Ghosh, Ed.). International Labor Organization (ILO) Geneva. Retrieved from https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ/documents/ publication/wcms_488475.pdf
30. Meltem, & İnce, Y. (2017). Measuring and analysing women’s empowerment in Turkey. Journal of Management and Economics Research Cilt, 15, 171–193. https://doi.org/10.11611/yead.306816
31. Moser, C. O. N. (1989). Gender planning in the third world: Meeting practical and strategic gender needs. World Development, 17(11), 1799–1825. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(89)90201-5
32. OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey 2018. (2018). OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/eco_surveys-tur-2018-en
33. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Frels, R. Rebecca K. (2016). 7 steps to a comprehensive literature review : a multimodal & cultural approach. SAGE Publications Ltd.
34. Ortner, S. B. (1974). Is female to male as nature is to culture? In M. Z. Rosaldo and L. Lamphere (Ed.), Woman, culture, and society (pp. 67–87). Stanford University Press. Retrieved from https://www.uio.no/studier/emner/ sv/sai/SOSANT1600/v12/Ortner_Is_female_to_male.pdf
35. Özkanli, Ö. (2001). Women’s employment in Turkey- trends and prospects. H.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 123–141. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/311283
36. Pearce, D. (1978). The feminization of poverty: Women, work, and welfare. Urban and Social Change Review. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ182487
37. Pearson, R. (1998). Nimble fingers revisited. Reflections on women and Third World industrialisation in the late twentieth century. London England Routledge 1998. Retrieved from https://www.popline.org/node/531246
38. Pencho, P. (2016). Book Review: A history of the global economy 1500 to the present. Edited by Joerg Baten. Economic Alternatives, (4), 532–535. Retrieved from https://www.unwe.bg/uploads/Alternatives/Book_R_2016 _Issue4_en-12.pdf
39. Piketty, T. (2015). The economics of inequality. Harvard University Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.com. tr/books?id=_Z7XCgAAQBAJ&dq=piketty+inequalities&lr=&source=gbs_navlinks_s
40. Rother, E. T. (2007). Systematic literature review X narrative review. Acta Paulista de Enfermagem, 20(2), v–vi. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-21002007000200001
41. Sugur, N., & Sugur, S. (2005). Gender and work in Turkey: Case study on women workers in the textile industry in Bursa. Middle Eastern Studies, 41(2), 269–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/00263200500035330
42. Tansel, A. (2001). Economic development and female labor force participation in Turkey: Time-series evidence and cross-province estimates. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.524.4034 &rep=rep1&type=pdf
43. The World Bank. (2019). Labor force, female (% of total labor force) | Data. Retrieved from https://data.worldbank. org/indicator/SL.TLF.TOTL.FE.ZS?locations=BD
44. TURKSTAT. (2015). Turkish Statistical Institute, Hayvancılık İstatistikleri. Retrieved April 2, 2019, from http:// www.turkstat.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1007
45. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). Labor force characteristics by race and ethnicity, 2015. Retrieved from www.bls.gov/cps/documentation.htm.
46. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2017). A profile of the working poor, 2015 characteristic total in the labor force. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/working-poor/2015/pdf/home.pdf
47. UNECE. (2010). Country report: Turkey. Retrieved from https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/Gender/ documents/Beijing%2B15/Turkey.pdf
48. UNESCO. (2016). World social science report 2016 : challenging inequalities : pathways to a just world. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245825
49. Walby, S., Armstrong, J., & Strid, S. (2012). Intersectionality: Multiple inequalities in social theory. Sociology, 46(2), 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038511416164
50. World Economic Forum. (2019). The Global Gender Gap Report 2018 Insight Report. Cologny/Geneva. https://doi. org/13: 978-2-940631-00-1