CC BY
60
GENDER INEQUALITY INDICES FOR THE EUROPEAN PARTNERSHIP COUNTRIES COMPARISON
E.I. Kharchenko
Methodology and Methods of Sociological Research Chair Taras Shevchenko National University of Kiev Volodymyrska St., 64/13, Kiev, Ukraine, 01601
Overcoming gender inequality is a serious challenge for many countries all over the world. Different reforms aiming at reduction of gender inequality are often a necessary condition for joining international alliances and associations. The article presents an example of comparative analysis of gender statuses in European partnership countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and Russian Federation (1) on the one hand, and Iceland — on the other hand due to the latter leading position in the Global Gender Gap ranking. This ranking as well as the results of the comparative analysis can be useful for lecturers in the courses on gender inequality, international comparative studies and others. The author provides a definition of the concept "gender inequality", an overview of existing methodological approaches to the international gender inequality measurement and interpretation. Based on the Global Gender Gap Index (GGGI) author describes men and women positions in the countries mentioned above in such socially important fields as politics, economy, education, and life expectancy; provides her own explanations of the current situation and perspectives for its development. The study shows that for all the countries under consideration the most problematic are (1) political sphere in the terms of women's empowerment and (2) the sphere of healthcare from the point of quality and duration of men's lives. The most unproble-matic field from the comparative gender analysis point of view is educational sphere. According to the results of the comparative analysis, the most egalitarian country seems to be Moldova, while the least egalitarian — Azerbaijan. This article is based on the data of the International project ReSET «European visions and divisions: comparative studies in improving of teaching sociology" (supported by OSI HESP in 2010—2012).
Key words: gender; gender inequality; gender empowerment; measurement; comparative analysis; Global Gender Gap Index (GGGI); European partnership countries.
Today gender equality is considered as the humanist ideal and one of the keys to successful development of the world. A lot of countries and international associations declared gender equality one of their basic life principles, for example European Union (EU). Many countries, especially the eastern neighbors of the EU that aim to join European Union, understand that for a quick and successful integration it is necessary to achieve not only the specified standards of living, but also the gender equality. To monitor the global gender inequality situation, and the results of national attempts to overcome it many measuring instruments were developed. The article provides an overview of such instruments, proposes some ways for gender indices improvement, presents an example of using Global Gender Gap Index (GGGI) to compare the gender inequality situation in the European partnership countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and Russia on the one hand, and Iceland (as a leader of the ranking and the member of EU) — on the other, and outlines the results of the current reforms that aim to guarantee gender equality and are a necessary step for joining EU. In order to estimate the reforms' priorities and outcomes, as well as of different gender programs
and projects effectiveness, the author proposes two approaches — synchronic and dia-chronic — on the basis of comparative studies and international indices of gender inequality.
Thus, gender inequality — is a kind of inequality that reveals itself in the impossibility of full realization of one's rights due to his gender and gender discrimination practices. The cross-national perspective of gender analysis allows to assess both — gender equality (World Bank indices, International Economic Forum, etc.) and mechanisms of its production and reproduction in various spheres of public life.
There are two main sources of gender inequality: institutional (legal restrictions for representatives of either sex in rights, such as prohibition for women to drive cars in Saudi Arabia) and cultural (normative gender roles, occupations, and social positions). Gender differences are usually measured by international indices based on indicators of gender equality in various spheres of social life (2):
♦ Gender Inequality Index (GII) reflects women's limited opportunities in three 'dimensions' — reproductive health, empowerment and at the labor market [7] (3);
♦ Gender-related Development Index (GDI) is quite similar to Human Development Index (HDI) (4), but it takes into account gender inequality in men and women achievements. Its methodology imposes penalties for inequality, for instance, if GDI falls, i.e. the gender gap in achievements increases. The greater the gender disparity in basic opportunities, the lower is country's GDI compared to its HDI. GDI is actually a version of HDI adapted for measuring gender inequality [2];
♦ Relative Status of Women (RSW) consists of the same components as GDI except for the comparison of absolute levels of gender achievements. It takes into account average levels of three indicators: the ratio of female and male involvement in education, the ratio of female and male life expectancy according to the European Gender Equality Index, and the relative female and male returns to labor [3];
♦ European Union Gender Equality Index combines different gender indicators in one resulting index — six core measures (work, money, knowledge, time, power and health) and two satellite ones (intersecting inequalities and violence). This index measures gender gaps taking into account differences in gender achievements to ensure that gender gaps are not perceived as normal and positive (only for European Union Members) [1];
♦ Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) as a measure of agency evaluates advances in women's positions at political and economic forums; examines the extent to which women and men can participate in economic and political life and in decision-making; while GDI focuses on the expansion of capabilities, GEM considers how these capabilities are used to take advantages of life [2] (5);
♦ Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI) captures inequalities based on social institutions (inequality outcomes such as educational restrictions, health status, economic and political participation) and measures 'inputs' for such inequalities in 102 non-OECD countries; social institutions are defined as long-lasting codes of
conduct, norms, traditions, informal and formal laws that determine the gender equality [10];
♦ Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI) takes into account not only the average achievements of the country (health, education and income), but also how these achievements are distributed among its population (level of inequality) [8];
♦ Gender Equality Index (GEI) measures the gap between women and men in education, economic and political empowerment [4];
♦ Global Gender Gap Index (GGGI) estimates how countries distribute resources and opportunities among men and women regardless the overall amount of the resources; shows the scale of the gender inequality gap in four areas [5]: 1) economic participation — salaries, access to high-skilled employment, etc.; 2) educational opportunities — access to basic and higher levels of education; 3) health and survival — life expectancy and gender balance; 4) political empowerment — genders' roles in decision-making structures. The more equal are positions of men and women, the higher place in ranking the country occupies (table 1).
To estimate the increase/decrease of the gender gap we can analyze two figures: the rank of the country in the international rating, and GGGI value. The place in ranking shows that the country manages to meet the global criteria of gender equality. For instance, despite the fact that the index of gender development in Ukraine in 2006—2007 did not change, the country's rank fell by 9 points, while Armenia in 2007—2008 increased its index by 0,003, but lost 7 points. To prove that the world keeps on approaching gender equality we have to compare indices of gender inequality and countries' positions in ranking. For example, Moldova in 2006 with the index of 0,712 occupied the 17th place, while in 2010 with the index of 0,716 — only 34th.
In general, none of the countries (except Iceland) kept up stable positive (gender gap decreasing) or negative (gender gap increasing) dynamics in GGGI. To understand what leads to increase or decrease of the index we have to consider its sub-indices (table 2).
The size of the article does not allow to analyze each subindex for the period of 2006—2014, so we will consider only 4 key subindices in 2013—2014 (table 3). For instance, Moldova from 2012 to 2013 fell by 7 points in the ranking due to GGGI decrease by 0,007 (from 0,710 to 0,703). One of the reasons is the decrease of women economic participation — reduction of the number of women who had jobs (compared to men), decrease in women salaries and opportunities to occupy top positions (Table 4).
One possible explanation of the situation is that 2012 was a hard year for the national economy of Modova: GDP fell by 0,8%, exports — by 2,5%, industrial production — by 3.1%, and the number of registered enterprises was lowest since 2003. In other words, there is deterioration in economics and decline in business activities — they usually worsen the position of women due to the gender stereotype that «a man is the breadwinner of the family». Secondly, there is a decrease of educational attainment subindex by 0,006 due to the reduction of number of women receiving primary education (as compared to men), probably because of changes in demographic pyramid and chances to enroll on primary school.
N>
Global Gender Gap Index ranking: 2006—2014
Table 1
Country 2006 2006 2007 2007 2008 2008 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014
rank score rank score rank score rank score rank score rank score rank score rank score rank score
Iceland 4 0,781 4 0,783 4 0,799 1 0,827 1 0,849 1 0,853 1 0,864 1 0,873 1 0,859
Moldova 17 0,712 21 0,717 20 0,724 36 0,71 34 0,716 39 0,708 45 0,71 52 0,703 25 0,7405
Ukraine 48 0,679 57 0,679 62 0,685 61 0,689 63 0,687 64 0,6861 65 0,689 64 0,692 56 0,705
Russian 49 0,677 45 0,686 42 0,699 51 0,698 45 0,704 43 0,703 59 0,698 61 0,6983 75 0,693
Federation
Georgia 54 0,67 67 0,666 82 0,665 83 0,668 88 0,659 86 0,662 85 0,669 86 0,675 85 0,6855
Azerbaijan n/a n/a 59 0,6781 61 0,685 89 0,662 100 0,644 91 0,657 99 0,654 99 0,658 94 0,675
Armenia n/a n/a 71 0,665 78 0,667 90 0,661 84 0,667 84 0,665 92 0,663 94 0,663 103 0,622
Table 2
Gender Gap Index subindices
Economic Participation and Opportunities Subindex
_Ratio: Female and male labor force participation_
Gender wage equality for similar work (turned into female-over-male ratio)
_Ratio: Estimated female earned income over male income_
Ratio: Female legislators, senior officials and managers as compared to male Ratio: Female professional and technical workers as compared to male
Educational Attainment Subindex
_Ratio: Female literacy rate as compared to male_
_Ratio: Female primary enrolment as compared to male_
_Ratio: Female secondary level enrolment as compared to male_
_Ratio: Female tertiary enrolment as compared to male_
Health and Survival Subindex
_Ratio: Female life expectancy as compared to male_
_Sex ratio at birth_
Political Empowerment Subindex
_Ratio: Number of women in parliament as compared to male_
_Ratio: Number of women at ministerial level as compared to male_
Ratio: Number of years of a female as a head of the state (in the last 50 years)
Table 3
Detailed Global Gender Gap Index (2012—2014)
Country 2012 overall rank score 2013 overall rank score 2014 overall rank score 2012 economic rank score 2013 economic rank score 2014 economic rank score 2012 education rank score 2013 education rank score 2014 education rank score 2012 health rank score 2013 health rank score 2014 health rank score 2012 political rank score 2013 political rank score 2014 political rank score
Iceland 1 0,864 1 0,873 1 0,8594 27 0,754 22 0,768 7 0,8169 1 1 1 1 1 1 98 0,969 97 0,969 128 0,9654 1 0,732 1 0,754 1 0,6554
Moldova 45 0,71 52 0,703 25 0,7405 21 0,76 32 0,74 11 0,8077 42 0,996 74 0,99 56 0,9949 34 0,979 34 0,979 37 0,9791 85 0,104 87 0,104 59 0,1802
Russian Federation 59 0,698 61 0,698 75 0,6927 39 0,719 42 0,72 42 0,7257 35 0,998 36 0,998 28 0,9998 34 0,979 34 0,979 37 0,9791 90 0,095 94 0,095 125 0,0662
Ukraine 64 0,689 64 0,693 56 0,7056 34 0,725 30 0,742 31 0,7483 22 0,999 27 0,999 29 0,9998 34 0,979 75 0,973 74 0,973 119 0,053 119 0,058 105 0,1012
Georgia 85 0,669 86 0,675 85 0,6855 57 0,676 64 0,674 66 0,6751 89 0,979 89 0,979 80 0,9887 129 0,949 126 0,955 115 0,967 109 0,071 97 0,091 94 0,1111
Armenia 92 0,663 94 0,663 103 0,6622 76 0,644 82 0,638 82 0,6478 25 0,999 29 0,999 31 0,9996 130 0,944 131 0,949 142 0,9332 114 0,066 115 0,066 123 0,068
Azerbaijan 99 0,654 99 0,658 94 0,6753 74 0,648 72 0,659 52 0,7087 84 0,983 85 0,982 92 0,9840 135 0,920 136 0,925 137 0,9441 113 0,066 114 0,066 127 0,0642
Indices of economic participation and opportunities in Moldova (2012—2013)
Table 4
Indices 2012 2013
Labour force participation 0,92 0,91
Wage equality for similar work 0,71 0,67
Estimated earned income (US$) 0,66 0,66
Legislators, senior officials and managers 0,61 0,57
Professional and technical workers 1,00 1,00
N> -J
Table 5
Educational Attainment in Moldova (female to male ratio, 2012—2013)
Educational Attainment 2012 2013
Literacy 0,99 0,99
Enrolment in primary education 1 0,98
Enrolment in secondary education 1 1
Enrolment in tertiary education 1 10
It should be mentioned that education is one of the spheres where gender gap is minimal, while politics is one of the most unequal spheres: the world's highest political empowerment subindex reaches 0,7544 (2013), while educational attainment — around 1. The struggle of women for voting rights began in 1870s, by 1930s in most European countries women won the right to vote and be elected. However, the number of women in politics is still small (table 6—7).
Table 6
Percentage of seats held by women in national parliaments [11]
Country 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
European Union 22,2 23 24,7 25,2 25,7 25,5 26,3 27,5 30 30 30
Iceland 33,3 33,3 33,3 33,3 42,9 42,9 39,7 39,7 39,7 40 41
Ukraine 5,3 8,7 8,2 8,2 8 8 8 9,4 9,4 12 12
Russian Federation 9,8 9,8 14 14 14 14 13,6 13,6 13,6 14 14
Belarus 29,1 29,1 29,1 31,8 31,8 31,8 31,8 26,6 26,6 27 27
Moldova 21,8 21,8 21,8 21,8 23,8 18,8 19,8 19,8 19,8 18 22
Armenia 5,3 5,3 9,2 8,4 9,2 9,2 8,4 10,7 10,7 11 11
Georgia 9,4 9,4 9,4 6 5,1 6,5 6,6 12 12 12 11
Azerbaijan 13,0 11,3 11,4 11,4 11,4 16 16 16 16 16 16
Table 7
Political Empowerment Subindex in 2014 (female to male ratio)
Country Rank Women in parliament Women in ministerial positions Years with female head of the state (in last 50 years)
Iceland 1 0,66 0,6 0,68
Moldova 59 0,23 0,38 0,03
Russian Federation 125 0,16 0,07 0
Georgia 94 0,14 0,27 0,01
Azerbaijan 127 0,18 0,03 0
Ukraine 105 0,11 0,17 0,06
Armenia 123 0,12 0,13 0
Some authors suggest suggests that a variety of factors contributes to this phenomenon: such structural barriers as level of socioeconomic development and the proportion of women in professional and managerial positions; such political institutions as proportional electoral system and gender quotas in party recruitment; and the impact of po-
litical culture, including the predominance of traditional attitudes toward women in decision-making roles [9. P. 130]. Studies of the role of the political recruitment system in establishing democracies such as Britain, Finland, and the Netherlands show that these attitudes influence both — whether women are ready to become candidates for the office (supply side of the equation) and the criteria used by 'gatekeepers' (party members and leaders, media, financial circles, and electorate) to evaluate 'suitability' of candidates (demand side).
In societies with traditional interpretation of gender roles women are reluctant to run for an office and even if they do, they fail to attract sufficient support to win. Recent studies show that female politicians mention hostile attitudes toward women's political participation as one of the most important barriers for running for parliamentary positions [9. P. 133]. "Egalitarian attitudes toward women in office are more widespread in postindustrial societies, reflecting broad patterns of socioeconomic development and cultural modernization. Moreover, these attitudes are not simply interesting in themselves. They seem to have a powerful impact on political reality, since egalitarian values are significantly associated with women being successfully elected to office. Culture matters... The more egalitarian attitudes among the younger generation in postindustrial societies, especially among younger women, suggest that over time we can expect to see continued progress in female representation in these societies" [9. P. 144].
However, this is unlikely to happen in Ukraine in the nearest future due to the persistent prejudices against women's political leadership: see the distribution of answers to the question "Does ability to get a position in the state governing bodies depend on gender?" [14. P. 35] (Figure 1). 40% of men and every second woman in Ukraine believe that it is harder for females to occupy a decision-making position, which represents a strong psychological barrier for political participation.
60 50 40 30 20 10 D
B Yes, it is harder for male □ Yes, it is harder for female
H Xo, it doesn't depend on tbe gender □ Don't know
Figure 1. "Does ability to get a place in the state governing bodies depend on gender?" (%)
To maximize its competitiveness and development potential, each country should strive for gender equality in the economic sphere too, i.e. guarantee women the same rights, responsibilities and opportunities as men possess (table 8).
Table 8
Economic Participation and Opportunity, 2014
Country Rank Sex ratio (male/ female) Labour force participation (female to male ratio) Wage equality (ratio) Legislators, senior officials, and managers (ratio) Professional and technical workers (ratio) Female adult unemploy ment (%) Male adult unemployment (%) Women chances to head an enterprise*
Moldova 32 0,9 0,91 0,67 0,57 2,16 6 8 5
Iceland 7 0,95 0,95 0,74 0,67 1,00 6 8 6
Russian Federation 42 0,86 0,87 0,68 0,64 1,81 5,1 5,8 4,9
Azerbaijan 72 0,98 0,92 0,73 0,08 1,59 6 5 5
Ukraine 31 0,85 0,85 0,69 0,66 1,74 6,4 8,5 4,7
Georgia 64 0,89 0,77 0,76 0,51 1,62 13 17 5
Armenia 82 0,87 0,74 0,66 0,31 1,88 35 22 5
*Survey data, responses on a 1-to-7 scale (1 = worst score, 7 = best score).
Unfortunately, GGGI does not take into account horizontal segregation that would help to understanding the situation better and to see the leading spheres of gender inequality. Unlike previous years, there is no such record as "female teachers, primary/secondary/higher education (%)" in 2014 report. After graduation, women face barriers that prevent them from taking positions that correspond to their level of education: thus, despite the fact that women more often have higher education diploma (table 9), they are less likely to occupy senior positions.
Table 9
Indicators of educational involvement, 2014
Country Rank Literacy Enrol- Enrol- Enrol- Female Female Female
rate (fe- ment in ment in ment in teachers, teachers, teachers,
male to primary second- higher primary second- higher
male educa- ary edu- educa- educa- ary edu- education,
ratio) tion cation tion tion, % cation, % % (2013)
(ratio) (ratio) (ratio) (2013) (2013)
Armenia 31 1 1,1 1,19 1,57 100 84 56
Azerbaijan 92 1 0,98 0,98 1,05 88 n/a 52
Moldova 56 0,99 0,99 1,01 1,32 97 77 57
Georgia 80 1 1,01 0,95 1,27 86 59 39
Russian 28 1 1 n/a 1,35 98 81 56
Federation
Ukraine 29 1 1,02 1 1,15 99 76 n/a
Iceland 1 1 1,01 1,01 1,70 n/a n/a 47
In the process of self-realization in social and political spheres, women face discrimination that makes them feel unsure of their chances and understand that they have to overcome hidden and obvious resistance from colleagues and managers ('glass ceiling', 'sticky floor'). In the study conducted by Institute of Sociology of Ukraine, respondents were asked about the circumstances that prevent men and women from building successful careers [14. P. 42]. The major obstacle — "lack of professionalism" — was mentioned by both sexes, while other were different for women and men: women more often chose "having a family and children" (the problem of 'double workload, see ta-
ble 10), men — "lack of education". Another obstacle is that managers do not want to hire a woman because of her possible maternity leave. General attitudes towards female entrepreneurs are rather neutral, but there is a clear trend: the smaller the business, the more positive is an attitude to the woman that runs it [14. P. 58].
Table 10
Mean age of marriage for women (Global Gender Gap Report 2014)
Country Age, years
Moldova 22
Armenia 24
Ukraine 23
Azerbaijan 24
Russian Federation 24
Iceland 28
Georgia 23
Still another problem is that women receive less salary than man for the same work in private enterprises (in state budgetary organizations salaries are fixed). There are several explanations of this fact: women have lower salary requirements than men; women are more conservative when changing jobs, so even being aware of salary differences they continue to work in the organization.
The last subindex that we have to consider is health and survival subindex, particularly life expectancy (table 11).
Table 11
Life expectancy (male, female) [11]
Country Year
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F
Iceland 79,6 83,5 79,5 82,9 79,6 83,4 80 83,3 78,8 83,8 79,8 84,1 80,7 84,1 81,6 84,3 82 85
Ukrai ne 62,2 74 62,4 74,1 62,5 74,2 62,5 74,3 63,8 74,9 65,3 75,5 66 75,9 66,1 76 66 76
Russian Federation 64 71,9 64,2 72 64,3 72,1 64,5 72,1 64,6 72,3 64,7 72,4 64,8 72,6 64,9 72,7 66 76
Moldova 64 71,9 64,2 72 64,3 72,1 64,5 72,1 64,6 72,3 64,7 72,4 64,8 72,6 64,9 72,7 65 73
Armenia 70 76,8 70,2 77 70,5 77,2 70,7 77,4 70,8 77,5 70,9 77,7 71,1 77,8 71,2 77,9 71 78
Georgia 69,4 76,6 69,9 76,8 69,7 77 69,8 77,1 70 77,3 70,1 77,4 70,3 77,5 70,4 77,7 71 78
Azerbaijan 66,2 71,8 66,6 72,3 66,9 72,8 67,1 73,1 67,3 73,4 67,4 73,6 67,5 73,7 67,6 73,8 68 74
Despite the general trend of life expectancy increase, male life expectancy lags behind female. In the Eastern European partners of EU, deaths from external causes (accidental alcohol poisoning, homicides and suicides) and social diseases are quite frequent, especially among men. For instance, male mortality from accidental alcohol poisoning in 2009 amounted to 0,1 per 100 000 in Armenia, 0,2 — in Azerbaijan, while deaths of women from the same causes — 0 in both countries. There are stable high mortality
rates from accidental alcohol poisoning in Russia (25 deaths per 100 000 for men and 6,5 for women) and Ukraine (23,4 and 4,5 respectively) [15] (6). Alcohol consumption increases the risk of death from cirrhosis, pancreatitis, and cancer, as well as from external causes (alcohol poisoning, homicides, suicides, accidents, injuries, etc.) [13]. Mortality rates from suicide in CIS are about twice as large as in EU: in 2009 the death rate from suicide and self-inflicted injuries in the EU countries was about 17 cases per 100 000, while in CIS — 34,6 (see also tables 12—13).
Table 12
Mortality from self-harm per 100 000, 2012 [12]
Country Male Female
Moldova 29,34 5,87
Armenia 5,27 1,18
Ukraine 35,61 6,89
Azerbaijan 2,3 1,02
Russian Federation 39,67 7,5
Georgia 6,44 1,4
Table 13
Mortality from violence per 100 000, 2012 [12]
Country Male Female
Moldova 12,9 6,2
Armenia 4,9 1,1
Ukraine 8,0 2,9
Azerbaijan 8,7 2,2
Russian Federation 17 4,8
Georgia 4,3 0,8
It is hard to compare Ukraine with other countries by the rates of mortality due to the "Revolution of dignity" events and the ATO (antiterrorist operation) that begun in 2014 (the level death from external factors grew up to 374 per 100 000).
The quality of life and lifestyle influence not only mortality from external causes, but the mortality from so-called 'social diseases'. High male mortality from tuberculosis is largely due to the untimely treatment in hospitals, as well as irresponsible attitude to one's health and specific lifestyle (smoking, alcoholism and drug addiction). Tuberculosis remains one of the most common diseases among infectious diseases, especially among men (table 14).
Table 14
Mortality from tuberculosis per 100 000, 2012 [12]
Country Male Female
Moldova 22,6 3,2
Armenia 10,9 1
Ukraine 25,2 4,1
Azerbaijan 6,8 1,7
Russian Federation 24,5 4,5
Georgia 7,2 1,2
Thus, gender inequality is a form of social inequality that has been the feature of the whole world since ancient times. Before the industrial revolution, gender inequality was justified by the unequal physical abilities of men and women. Nowadays gender inequality is mostly culturally conditioned — social positions of men and women in different countries are not the same due to the dominant interpretations of gender roles and responsibilities in private and public life. To measure the distance between genders, a large number of indices were developed (GDI, GGGI, GEM, SIGI, GII, etc). These indices take into account data on various social spheres such as politics, economy, education, health care and others. According to these indices, five countries considered in the article (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Russia and Ukraine), which are included in the European Partnership program, occupy middle positions in the international gender ranking (based on Gender Gap Index) and lag far behind the EU countries due to the female underrepresentation in politics and business activities, while at the same time men lag far behind women in life expectancy. To understand the roots of gender inequality and the ways to change the situation, we have to analyze different countries' values, traditions and lifestyles as well as political initiatives and sociological projects that aim to 'measure' the gender inequality patterns (7).
NOTES
(1) Russia is not a partner of the European partnership program, but has a great influence on the countries mentioned.
(2) For further information about differences, limitations, etc. of these indices see: "Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the Gender Inequality Index (GII)" UNDP. Human Development Reports // URL: http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/faq; Suman S. The Gender Inequality Index alongside alternative Gender Measures: Pros & Cons and the Debate // Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative Department of International Development Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford // URL: http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/GII-Presentation-Week2-Dr2.pdf.
(3) For more details on GII see: Technical Notes. UNDP. Human Development Reports // URL: http://hdr.undp.org/ en/media/HDR_2010_EN_TechNotes_reprint.pdf.
(4) Human Development Index (HDI) is a generalized indicator of human development that measures the average achievements of the country in three basic dimensions: long and healthy life, access to knowledge and decent standards of living.
(5) For more details on GDI and GEM see: Technical Note 1 HDR 2007/2008. UNDP. Human Development Reports // URL: http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_20072008_Tech_Note_1.pdf.
(6) The article is based on the year 2009 data, for more recent data see World Health Organization website.
(7) For more political initiatives of the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) see: URL: http://eige.europa.eu.
REFERENCES
[1] About the Gender Equality Index: European Institute for Gender Equality. URL: http://eige. europa. eu/ content/gender-equality-index#/about.
[2] Analytical tools for human development": Lisboa School of Economic and Management. URL: http://www.iseg.utl.pt/disciplinas/mestrados/dci/idh.htm#5.
[3] Dijkstra A.G. "Towards a fresh start in measuring gender equality: A contribution to the debate. Journal of Human Development. 2006. Vol. 7. № 2t.
[4] Gender Equity Index (GEI). URL: http://www.socialwatch.org/taxonomy/term/527.
[5] Global Gender Gap: World Economic Forum. URL: http://www.weforum.org/issues/global-gender-gap.
[6] Global Gender Gap Reports 2006—2014: World Economic Forum. URL: http://www.weforum.org/reports.
[7] Human Development Reports: UNDP. URL: http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev/indices.
[8] Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index: UNDP Human Development Reports. URL: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/inequality-adjusted-human-development-index-ihdi.
[9] Inglehart R.F., Norris P. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[10] Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI): OECD. URL: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/ 52/33/42289479.pdf.
[11] World data Bank. URL: http://databank.worldbank.org/ddp/home.do.
[12] World Health Organization: Disease and Injury Mortality Estimates, 2000—2012. URL: http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/estimates/en/index1.html.
[13] Khalturina D. Alkohol i narkotiki kak vazhneishie faktori demograficheskogo krizisa v Rossii i Ukraine [Alcohol and drugs as key factors of the demographic crisis in Russia and Ukraine]. URL: http://www.literatura.tvereza.info/21/Halturina/factorycrizisa_ru.html.
[14] Sayenko Y. (Ed.) Genderni stereotypy ta stavlennya gromadskosti do gendernih problem ukrain-skogo suspilstva. Kiev: VAITE, 2007.
[15] Scherbakova E. V stranah SNG ostayesya vysokoi, osobenno sredi muzhchin, smertnost ot vneshnih prichin i socialnih boleznei [Death rate from external causes and social diseases remains high, especially among men, in CIS]. Demoscope Weekly. 2011. № 469-470. URL: http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2011/0469/barom05.php.
ИСПОЛЬЗОВАНИЕ МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫХ ИНДЕКСОВ ГЕНДЕРНОГО НЕРАВЕНСТВА ДЛЯ СРАВНИТЕЛЬНОЙ ОЦЕНКИ СИТУАЦИИ В СТРАНАХ ЕВРОПЕЙСКОГО ПАРТНЕРСТВА
Е.И. Харченко
Кафедра методологии и методов социологических исследований Киевский национальный университет имени Тараса Шевченко ул. Владимирская, 64/13, Киев, Украина, 01601
Преодоление гендерного неравенства — серьезнейший вызов для многих стран мира. Кроме того, разработка и реализация мер по сокращению гендерного разрыва часто выступают обязательными условиями для вступления страны в международные союзы и организации. В статье представлен пример проведения сопоставительного гендерного анализа в странах Европейского партнерства: Армении, Азербайджане, Грузии, Молдове, Украине и Российской Федерации (1) — с одной стороны, и Исландии — с другой, поскольку данная страна занимает лидирующие позиции во всех международных гендерных индексах, демонстрируя высочайшие показатели гендерного равенства во всех сферах общественной жизни. Глобальный рейтинг гендерного разрыва сам по себе, а также
результаты его использования в сравнительном межстрановом анализе могут быть полезны для исследователей и преподавателей, читающих курсы по гендерной социологии, сравнительным исследованиям и т.д. Автор приводит определение понятия «гендерное неравенство» и предлагает краткий обзор методологических подходов к сопоставительной оценке гендерного неравенства в международном контексте и интерпретации ее результатов. На основе Индекса глобального тендерного разрыва автор характеризует положение мужчин и женщин в перечисленных выше странах в таких социально значимых областях, как политическая и экономическая деятельность, образование и продолжительность жизни; обосновывает собственные интерпретации нынешней ситуации и перспектив ее развития. Проведенное исследование показало, что наиболее явный гендерный дисбаланс в рассматриваемых странах наблюдается в (1) политике (с точки зрения вовлеченности женщин) и (2) здравоохранении (с позиций качества и продолжительности жизни мужчин). Наименьшие гендерные различия по результатам сопоставительного анализа были выявлены в образовательной сфере. Кроме того, по итогам исследования наиболее эгалитарной страной среди рассмотренных оказалась Молдова, наименее — Азербайджан. Такие выводы позволили сделать данные международного проекта «European visions and divisions: comparative studies in improving of teaching sociology" (при поддержке OSI HESP, 2010—2012), в котором принимал участие автор статьи.
Ключевые слова: гендер; гендерное неравенство; расширение возможностей женщин; измерение; сравнительный анализ; Индекс глобального гендерного разрыва; страны Европейского партнерства.
