The Wearing of the Headscarf & Labor Market Outcomes for Women in Turkey

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1, 51 - 75, 01.06.2018

Zeynep B.uğur

Öz

• Historically, female labor force participation (FLFP) rate has been very low in Turkey. As the majority of women in Turkey wear headscarves, this study examines if the ban on the religious garb contributed to the low FLFP rate. The study links the wearing of headscarves to labor market outcomes for women using the individual level data from 2 rounds of the National Demographic and Health Surveys (NDHS) conducted in 2003 and 2008, and 2 surveys conducted by the Konda Research Company in 2007 and 2011. After controlling other religious behaviors and values, it is demonstrated that urban women who wear headscarves are 3.6% to 8.5% less likely to be employed while the rate increases to between 17% to 28.2% among women with a university degree. This suggests that the impact of the headscarf ban was more damaging among women with degrees

Anahtar Kelimeler

Headscarf, Female Labor Force Participation, Turkey

Türkiye’deki Kadınlar için Baüörtüsü Takmak ve şü Hayatına Katılım

Öz

• Türkiye’de tarihsel olarak kadınların iü hayatına katılım oranları çok düüüktür. Bu çalıümada Türkiye’deki kadınların çoùunun baüörtüsü kullanmasına raùmen uygulanan baüörtüsü yasaùının kadınların iü hayatına katılımının düüük olmasında rolü olup olmadıùı incelenmiütir. Bu amaçla, 2003 ve 2008 yıllarında yapılan Türkiye Nüfus ve Saùlık Araütırması (TNSA)’nın bireysel düzeydeki verileri ve Konda Araütırma ûirketi tarafından 2007 ve 2011 yıllarında yapılan 2 anket kullanılarak kadınların baüörtüsü takma durumu iü hayatı çıktıları ile iliükilendirilmiütir. Diùer dini hayat ile ilgili davranıülar ve deùerler kontrol edildikten sonra, kentte yaüayan kadınlar arasında baüörtüsü kullananların çalıüıyor olma ihtimali %3.6 - %8.5 oranında daha düüüktür. Bu oran üniversite mezunu baüörtülü kadınlar için %17 ila %28.2’ye kadar daha düüüktür. Bu bulgular, baüörtüsü yasaùının özellikle üniversite eùitimi almıü kadınları daha çok etkilediùi sonucuna götürmektedir

Anahtar Kelimeler

Baüörtüsü, Kadının şühayatına Katılımı, Türkiye

Kaynakça

• AK-DER. (2010). Toplumsal Cinsiyet, Eüitlik & Baüörtüsü Yasakları. Re- trieved from http://www.akder.org/grafik/manager/Dokumanlar/ istatistik%20raporu%202010_t%C3%BCrk%C3%A7e.pdf
• Aksoy, M. (2005). Baüörtüsü-türban: batılılaüma-modernleüme, laiklik ve örtünme. şstanbul: Kitap Yayınevi.
• Assad, R. (2005). Informalization and Defeminization: Explaining the Unu- sual Pattern in Egypt. In N. Kudva & L. Benerı´a (Eds.), Rethinking Informalization: Poverty, Precarious Jobs and Social Protection (pp. 86–102): Cornell University Open Access Repository.
• Atasoy, B. S. (2016). Female Labour Force Participation in Turkey: The Role of Traditionalism. The European Journal of Development Research, 29, 675-707.
• Baülevent, C., & Onaran, Ö. (2004). The Effect of Export-Oriented Growth on Female Labor Market Outcomes in Turkey. World Development, 32(8), 1375-1393.
• Benli, F. (2011). 1964-2011 Türkiye’de ve Dünya’da Baüörtüsü Yasaùı Kro- nolojisi. Retrieved from şstanbul: BK (Biz Kimiz) 2011: Individual Level Data-şstanbul: Konda Research Company.
• Cagatay, N., & Ozler, S. (1995). Feminization of the labor force: The effects of long-term development and structural adjustment. World Develop- ment, 23(11), 1883–1894.
• Carkoglu, A., & Toprak, B. (2006). Religion, Society and Politics in Changing Turkey (Deùiüen Türkiye’de Din, Toplum Siyaset). şstanbul: TESEV.
• Carvalho, J. (2013). Veiling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(1), 337–370.
• Chick, K. (2010). Veil ban: Why Syria joins Europe in barring the niqab. Re- trieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2010/0720/ Veil-ban-Why-Syria-joins-Europe-in-barring-the-niqab
• Cindoglu, D. (2010). Headscarved Women In Professional Jobs: Revisiting Discrimination. Istanbul: TESEV.
• Clark, R., Ramsbey, T. W., & Adler, E. S. (1991). Culture, gender, and labour force participation: A crossnational study. Gender and Society, 5(1), 47–66.
• Dayioglu, M. (2000). Labor market participation of women in Turkey. In F. Acar & A. Gunes-Ayata (Eds.), Gender and Identity Construction: Women of Central Asia, the Caucasus and Turkey. Leiden: Brill.
• Dayıoùlu, M., & Kırdar, M. G. (2010). Determinants of and Trends in Labor Force Participation of Women in Turkey. Retrieved from Ankara
• Dedeoùlu, S. (2010). Visible Hands – Invisible Women: Garment Production in Turkey. Feminist Economics, 16(4), 1-32.
• Dunbar, H. (2009). Tunisian Women’s Current Liberties and Future Plans for Advancement. Illinois.
• Fernandez, R., Fogli, A., & Olivetti, C. (2004). Mothers and sons: Prefer- ence formation and female labour force dynamics. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119, 1249–1299.
• Forum, W. E. (2007). The Global Gender Gap. Retrieved from Geneva: http:// reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2007/.
• Forum, W. E. (2016). The Global Gender Gap Retrieved from Geneva: http:// reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2016/
• Göksel, ş. (2013). Female labor force participation in Turkey: The role of conservatism. Women’s Studies International Forum, 45-54.
• GYDLTA (Gündelik Yaüamda Din Laiklik ve Türban Araütırması) 2007: Individual Level Data-şstanbul: Konda Research Company.
• Hoodfar, V. (1991). Return to the veil Working Women: International Per- spectives on Labour and Gender Ideology (pp. 104-124). New York: Routledge.
• Human Rights Watch. (2009). Discrimination in the Name of Neutrality: Headscarf Bans for Teachers and Civil Servants in Germany. Re- trieved from http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/germa- ny0209_web.pdf
• Hürriyet, 2003, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/annem-de-basortulu -ama-turban-siyasi-simge-38511898
• şlkkaracan, I. (2012). Why so few women in the labor market in Turkey? Feminist Economics, 18(1), 1-37.
• Jenkins, G. (2008). Political Islam in Turkey: Running West, Heading East? New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Karaoglan, D., & Okten, C. (2012). Labor force participation of married women in Turkey: Is there an added or a discouraged worker effect? IZA Discussion Paper.
• Kottis, A. P. (1990). Shifts Over Time and Regional Variation in Women’s Labor Force Participation Rates in a Developing Economy. Journal of Development Economics, 33, 117-132.
• Kuru, A. (2009) Secularism and State Policies toward Religion The United States, France, and Turkey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Mahmud, S. (2005) Politics of Piety. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
• Mardell, M. (2006). Dutch MPs to decide on burqa ban. Retrieved from BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4616664.stm
• Mule, P., & Barthel, D. (1992). The Return to the Veil: Individual Autonomy vs. Social Esteem. Sociological Forum, 323-332.
• National Security Council. (1997, February 28). Decision No: 406 Appendix A.
• NDHS (National Demograhic Health Survey) 2003-2008: Individual Level Data-Ankara: Hacettepe Institute of Population Studies.
• Read, J. G., & Bartkowski, J. (2000). To veil or not to veil? A case study of identity negotiation among Muslim Women in Austin, Texas. Gender and Society, 395-417.
• Saharso, S. (2007). Headscarves: A Comparison of Public Thought and Pub- lic Policy in Germany and the Netherlands. Critical Review of Inter- national Social and Political Philosophy, 513-530.
• TA (Türban Araütırması) 2003-2007: Individual Level Data: şstanbul: Adil Gür Research Company.
• Tansel, A. (2001). Economic Development And Female Labor Force Par- ticipation In Turkey: Time-Series Evidence And Cross-Province Esti- mates ERC Working Papers.
• The Official NewsPaper. (1982). Sayı: 25/10/1982 - 17849. 2.
• The Official Newspaper. (2008). ANAYASA MAHKEMESş KARARI.
• Ugur, Z. B. (2017). Unveiling the Veil: The impact of Headscarf Ban on Edu- cational Attainment of Women in Turkey. Working Paper.
• Union of Turkish Bar Associations, Meslek Kuralları 20. Madde, (1971).
• Vakulenko, A. (2007). Islamic Headscarves and the European Convention on Human Rights. Social Legal Studies, 183-199.