1) Education as an eligibility to contest elections:-
News :- The Supreme Court has upheld the Haryana Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Act, 2015 which mandates that only those having minimum educational qualifications will be eligible to contest panchayat elections in the State.
What the court says :-
- The court is of the opinion that basic education would enable the candidates to effectively discharge duties of the panchayat.
- The court also says that education gives a human being the power to take informed decision
Provisions of the Act:-
General category candidates require a minimum qualification of Class X pass, men contesting in the Scheduled Caste category and women in the general category need to be Class VIII pass, while women in the Scheduled Caste category need to be Class V pass to be eligible.
Issue of this nature has 3 dimensions :-
- Rights issue
- State of our society
- Rationale behind the judgement
1)Rights Issue :-
Arguments against the judgement :-
- The basic element of democracy is participation.Its sole aim is to provide voice to each and every citizen irrespective of their caste , sex, religion, place of birth , social background, economic strength , educational qualification etc.
- Therefore making educational qualification a criteria will deprive most of the people from effective participation.
- It will make politics biased towards privileged sections of society .
- Every citizen has a right to vote irrespective of their educational qualification then why should he/she be restricted from contesting election .
- Legislation demands a political vision not technical expertise .
Comprehensive analysis :-
- Generally , it is held that contesting election is a basic right and every citizen can contest the election.
- However there exist a number of criteria that makes one ineligible to contest an election , For eg:- a general or a male candidate can not contest in a reserved constituency (SC/ST/Women).
- Though , for MP and MLA elections the women criteria is yet to come in to force, for panchyat elections at least 33% of seat are reserved for women.
From the above analysis, it is clear that the state discriminates among people on who can contest election on the basis of their gender or caste.
The question is – Is the above mentioned eligibility criteria for reserved constituency is discrimination ?To answer this question , we need to understand , why there are reserved constituencies?
Reserved constituencies:-
- Reserved constituencies are declared by delimitation commission .
- Under Article 82 of the Constitution, the Parliament by law enacts a Delimitation Act after every census.After coming into force ,the Central Government constitutes a Delimitation Commission.
- This Delimitation Commission demarcates the boundaries of the Parliamentary Constituencies as per provisions of the Delimitation Act.
- The present delimitation of constituencies has been done on the basis of 2001 census figures under the provisions of Delimitation Act, 2002.
- Notwithstanding the above, the Constitution of India was specifically amended in 2002 not to have delimitation of constituencies till the first census after 2026. Thus, the present Constituencies carved out on the basis of 2001 census shall continue to be in operation till the first census after 2026.
How the Reserved Constituencies are declared ?
- Allocation of seats for Scheduled Castes and Tribes in the Lok Sabha are made on the basis of proportion of Scheduled Castes and Tribes in the State concerned to that of the total population, vide provision contained in Article 330 of the Constitution of India read with Section 3 of the Representation of Peoples’ P. Act, 1950.
- So, on the basis of proportion the SC/ST constituencies are arrived and the logic being, wherever the majority of the population is SC/ST , the constituency is reserved.The philosophy being , the elected leader will serve the people better as he/she is one of them.
- If we use same analogy – A Brahmin leader will serve Brahmins better, a leader who has come from poor background will serve the poor better and so on .However , this is not true. We have evidence both in support and against this.
- Then, there are arguments that , only the privileged section among the SC/ST get the benefits of the government provisions and it does not reach those who are in real need.
- Yet , we have this provision because , from a broader perspective , our legislature will represent people from all sections, there by making it a true representative legislature.The concerns of all sections can be put forth in the legislature , there by helping it to make sensible laws and policies to serve every section of the population.For eg- A tribal leader will understand the importance of certain hill or river that is worshiped by fellow tribals and the place of the hills/river in the tribal psyche and way of life, thus can ably contribute to legislation by putting forward the socio-economic-religious impact of certain policy or law that may impact the tribals ,thus making the law more sensible and upon implementation which will not alienate them.
Now the part of reserve constituency is understood as long as the SC/ST is concerned. But, why we have reserve constituencies for Women ?
- The declaration of women constituencies in Panchyats is not a direct representation of Women as such ( in terms of Number). That means, a Panchayat is not reserved because the women population is more in the Panchayat . Hence numbers play no role here. This provision is more of philosophical in nature, which aims at women empowerment.
- By this provision , women will participate more in the grass-root level of politics and could work towards betterment of the society altogether.On a broader sense, this will give the women to participate in politics and this platform can be used to enter state level and national level politics.
Hence , above provision, which at first sight look like discrimination , are actually positive discrimination – where the state intervenes to uplift and bring certain section of society at par with other sections.
Eligibility to contest election can be looked up as a positive discrimination which can not only help promote value of education but also give the people an educated representative.And as proved above with regard to reserved constituencies , there exists positive discrimination as a precedence- so to say , there are no rights issue here (broader sense).
2)State of our Society:-
- As mentioned above only the privileged section among the SC/ST get the benefits of the government provisions and it does not reach those who are in real need.This is because , the privileged sections have access to information and other don’t have access to information because they don’t have the necessary education.
How Literate is our Literacy:-
- Though our literacy rate is around 75% , yet the functional literacy is way too low. this is because of the rudimentary definition of literacy :
- “Definition of Literacy :- Literacy, as defined in Census operations, is the ability to read and write with understanding in any language. A person who can merely read but cannot write is not classified as literate. Any formal education or minimum educational standard is not necessary to be considered literate“
- A candid analysis of illiteracy’s political and cultural consequences throughout the population will necessitate in our seeking to move literacy expectations beyond a rudimentary ability to read, write and calculate. The recognition that ‘literacy’ has to be situationally relevant has given rise to the concept of ‘functional literacy’, which has been referred to by the Second Education Commission.
- So to say, though our census says , India is 75% literate – the question is – are we ?
- The dismal state of affair has to change , if we want to be a true literate state – where literacy goes beyond just writing ,reading or doing addition, multiplication, subtraction and division. The literacy program yet to reach where it aims the development of literacy where one can do higher-order thinking – conceptualizing, inferring, inventing, testing, hypothesis and thinking critically.
3)Rationale behind the Judgement:-
- The rationale behind the judgement is well founded, there is a need for our leaders to have basic level of education – else it will render the leadership subject to undue influence from various corners.
- Moreover, if our leaders can’t read or write – it sends a wrong message to the society altogether. It inspires none to take up education.
- Education helps one to make informed decisions and thus a leader should be able to comprehend and deal with the issues better.
- It is education that has given an edge to certain Panchayats. As the leaders were educated , they could find alternative solution to the social problems.
- Chhavi rajawat of soda in Rajasthan, Arati Devi of Ganjam odisha or Sushma Bhadu of Haryana – they are the poster girls of changing the rural landscape in India.
- India lives in its villages and it is essential to change the rural landscape in our pursuit of developed India. Its education that helped them realize the potentiality of the village – they are not just leaders for few but in itself are inspiring tales who propagate the value of education.
- Though Government promotes right to education, it became necessary to have real time , on the field , living and inspiring leaders who can push the rural landscape and it’s people to embrace educations .
- Political vision comes from education.With out the basic education one may have political vision , but the chances of finding such individual is very slim and usually are exceptions.Exceptions are not rules and hence the argument of political vision is the only requirement is wrong founded – one should understand from where the political vision have genesis – mostly education.
- For one, the law provides for basic (Emphasis on Basic ) education ,which is very necessary and of course non-technical in nature.
Conclusion and Way Forward:-
- To Sum up , India is yet to realize the true literacy.Education still remains a choice of affordability for many.
- In order to help the needy , education is the only empowerment where information can flow to the masses and government benefits can reach to the deserving candidate.
- So while educated politicians are desired yet the minimum education as an eligibility to compete election is quite sensitive issue and a highly debated one, to strike a balance between the constitutional prudence and rural transformational pursuance, the changes of eligibility criteria in competing election should take the discourse of gradualism not radicalism i. e. in order to change the system the policy must take care to address and uplift the society to accept the changed system.
- The educational eligibility for competing election, though may stand against the opinions of constitutional and legal experts, still given our social desirability for better political representative – the change should be gradually implemented.
- Needless to say , unless we have educated leaders , irrespective of how many well intended polices , the rural India will not transform.One can argue that, educated leaders are not guarantee of transformation , but as a wise philosopher once said – “If you think Education is costly, try Ignorance”. In the same vein, we can’t remain ignorant of the fact, it is better to try and fail than not to try altogether , and all arguments against the judgement promotes status quo – and by now, we already know how dismal is our status quo.
- Until and unless this is implemented and experimented we will never realize the true facets and impacts of this public discourse and our opinions, knowledge and analysis will remain just an inference rather than a proven fact.
Way Forward:-
- Given its public impact it will give rise to few oddities such as corruption in educational practices, barring socio-politically enlightened but non educated leaders etc
- To compensate this, Government can enlarge the evening schools and enroll those who want to attend irrespective of their age, so that one who wants to contest Panchayat election , given adequate opportunity to make himself/herself eligible.
- Also , a gradual implementation will help to build the necessary social affinity for change.
2)Social Security Scheme for Farmers :-
The Government is implementing a number of schemes to help the farmers in increasing their productivity by reducing cost of cultivation, achieving higher yield per unit and by realizing remunerative prices. Some of the important new initiatives in this context are:
(i) Soil Health Card (SHC) scheme by which the farmers can know the major and minor nutrients available in their soils which will ensure judicious use of fertiliser application and thus save money of farmers. The balanced use of fertiliser will also enhance productivity and ensure higher returns to the farmers.
(ii) Neem Coated Urea is being promoted to regulate urea use, enhance its availability to the crop and reduce cost of fertilizers application. The entire quantity of domestically manufactured urea is now neem coated.
(iii) Parampragat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY) is being implemented with a view to promoting organic farming in the country. This will improve soil health and organic matter content and increase net income of the farmer so as to realise premium prices.
(iv) The Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY) is being implemented to expand cultivated area with assured irrigation, reduce wastage of water and improve water use efficiency.
(v) In addition, the Government is also implementing several Centrally Sponsored Schemes – National Food Security Mission (NFSM); Mission for Integrated Development of Horticulture (MIDH); National Mission on Oilseeds & Oilpalm (NMOOP); National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA); National Mission on Agricultural Extension & Technology (NMAET); National Crop Insurance Programme (NCIP); Unified National Agriculture Markets; and Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY).
(vi) The Government undertakes procurement of wheat and paddy under its ‘MSP operations’. In addition, Government implements Market Intervention Scheme (MIS)
Market Intervention Scheme (MIS) for procurement of agricultural and horticultural commodities not covered under the Minimum Price Support Scheme on the request of State/UT Government.
The MIS is implemented in order to protect the growers of these commodities from making distress sale in the event of bumper crop when the prices tend to fall below the economic level/cost of production.
Losses, if any, incurred by the procuring agencies are shared by the Central Government and the concerned State Government on 50:50 basis (75:25 in case of North-Eastern States). Profit, if any, earned by the procuring agencies is retained by them.
The proposed new National Crop Insurance Scheme will protect the interest of farmers with a broader coverage towards crop losses and other such natural calamities. This is an intervention to cover the risks involved in farming.
3)Anti Dengue Vaccine:-
- The Mexican government has approved the world’s first anti-dengue vaccine – Dengvaxia , which is designed to protect people in the age group 9-45 from all four subtypes of the virus.
Recent Posts
Steve Ovett, the famous British middle-distance athlete, won the 800-metres gold medal at the Moscow Olympics of 1980. Just a few days later, he was about to win a 5,000-metres race at London’s Crystal Palace. Known for his burst of acceleration on the home stretch, he had supreme confidence in his ability to out-sprint rivals. With the final 100 metres remaining,
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]Ovett waved to the crowd and raised a hand in triumph. But he had celebrated a bit too early. At the finishing line, Ireland’s John Treacy edged past Ovett. For those few moments, Ovett had lost his sense of reality and ignored the possibility of a negative event.
This analogy works well for the India story and our policy failures , including during the ongoing covid pandemic. While we have never been as well prepared or had significant successes in terms of growth stability as Ovett did in his illustrious running career, we tend to celebrate too early. Indeed, we have done so many times before.
It is as if we’re convinced that India is destined for greater heights, come what may, and so we never run through the finish line. Do we and our policymakers suffer from a collective optimism bias, which, as the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman once wrote, “may well be the most significant of the cognitive biases”? The optimism bias arises from mistaken beliefs which form expectations that are better than the reality. It makes us underestimate chances of a negative outcome and ignore warnings repeatedly.
The Indian economy had a dream run for five years from 2003-04 to 2007-08, with an average annual growth rate of around 9%. Many believed that India was on its way to clocking consistent double-digit growth and comparisons with China were rife. It was conveniently overlooked that this output expansion had come mainly came from a few sectors: automobiles, telecom and business services.
Indians were made to believe that we could sprint without high-quality education, healthcare, infrastructure or banking sectors, which form the backbone of any stable economy. The plan was to build them as we went along, but then in the euphoria of short-term success, it got lost.
India’s exports of goods grew from $20 billion in 1990-91 to over $310 billion in 2019-20. Looking at these absolute figures it would seem as if India has arrived on the world stage. However, India’s share of global trade has moved up only marginally. Even now, the country accounts for less than 2% of the world’s goods exports.
More importantly, hidden behind this performance was the role played by one sector that should have never made it to India’s list of exports—refined petroleum. The share of refined petroleum exports in India’s goods exports increased from 1.4% in 1996-97 to over 18% in 2011-12.
An import-intensive sector with low labour intensity, exports of refined petroleum zoomed because of the then policy regime of a retail price ceiling on petroleum products in the domestic market. While we have done well in the export of services, our share is still less than 4% of world exports.
India seemed to emerge from the 2008 global financial crisis relatively unscathed. But, a temporary demand push had played a role in the revival—the incomes of many households, both rural and urban, had shot up. Fiscal stimulus to the rural economy and implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission scales had led to the salaries of around 20% of organized-sector employees jumping up. We celebrated, but once again, neither did we resolve the crisis brewing elsewhere in India’s banking sector, nor did we improve our capacity for healthcare or quality education.
Employment saw little economy-wide growth in our boom years. Manufacturing jobs, if anything, shrank. But we continued to celebrate. Youth flocked to low-productivity service-sector jobs, such as those in hotels and restaurants, security and other services. The dependence on such jobs on one hand and high-skilled services on the other was bound to make Indian society more unequal.
And then, there is agriculture, an elephant in the room. If and when farm-sector reforms get implemented, celebrations would once again be premature. The vast majority of India’s farmers have small plots of land, and though these farms are at least as productive as larger ones, net absolute incomes from small plots can only be meagre.
A further rise in farm productivity and consequent increase in supply, if not matched by a demand rise, especially with access to export markets, would result in downward pressure on market prices for farm produce and a further decline in the net incomes of small farmers.
We should learn from what John Treacy did right. He didn’t give up, and pushed for the finish line like it was his only chance at winning. Treacy had years of long-distance practice. The same goes for our economy. A long grind is required to build up its base before we can win and celebrate. And Ovett did not blame anyone for his loss. We play the blame game. Everyone else, right from China and the US to ‘greedy corporates’, seems to be responsible for our failures.
We have lowered absolute poverty levels and had technology-based successes like Aadhaar and digital access to public services. But there are no short cuts to good quality and adequate healthcare and education services. We must remain optimistic but stay firmly away from the optimism bias.
In the end, it is not about how we start, but how we finish. The disastrous second wave of covid and our inability to manage it is a ghastly reminder of this fact.
On March 31, the World Economic Forum (WEF) released its annual Gender Gap Report 2021. The Global Gender Gap report is an annual report released by the WEF. The gender gap is the difference between women and men as reflected in social, political, intellectual, cultural, or economic attainments or attitudes. The gap between men and women across health, education, politics, and economics widened for the first time since records began in 2006.
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]No need to remember all the data, only pick out few important ones to use in your answers.
The Global gender gap index aims to measure this gap in four key areas : health, education, economics, and politics. It surveys economies to measure gender disparity by collating and analyzing data that fall under four indices : economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment.
The 2021 Global Gender Gap Index benchmarks 156 countries on their progress towards gender parity. The index aims to serve as a compass to track progress on relative gaps between women and men in health, education, economy, and politics.
Although no country has achieved full gender parity, the top two countries (Iceland and Finland) have closed at least 85% of their gap, and the remaining seven countries (Lithuania, Namibia, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Rwanda, and Ireland) have closed at least 80% of their gap. Geographically, the global top 10 continues to be dominated by Nordic countries, with —Iceland, Norway, Finland, and Sweden—in the top five.
The top 10 is completed by one country from Asia Pacific (New Zealand 4th), two Sub-Saharan countries (Namibia, 6th and Rwanda, 7th, one country from Eastern Europe (the new entrant to the top 10, Lithuania, 8th), and another two Western European countries (Ireland, 9th, and Switzerland, 10th, another country in the top-10 for the first time).There is a relatively equitable distribution of available income, resources, and opportunities for men and women in these countries. The tremendous gender gaps are identified primarily in the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia.
Here, we can discuss the overall global gender gap scores across the index’s four main components : Economic Participation and Opportunity, Educational Attainment, Health and Survival, and Political Empowerment.
The indicators of the four main components are
(1) Economic Participation and Opportunity:
o Labour force participation rate,
o wage equality for similar work,
o estimated earned income,
o Legislators, senior officials, and managers,
o Professional and technical workers.
(2) Educational Attainment:
o Literacy rate (%)
o Enrollment in primary education (%)
o Enrollment in secondary education (%)
o Enrollment in tertiary education (%).
(3) Health and Survival:
o Sex ratio at birth (%)
o Healthy life expectancy (years).
(4) Political Empowerment:
o Women in Parliament (%)
o Women in Ministerial positions (%)
o Years with a female head of State (last 50 years)
o The share of tenure years.
The objective is to shed light on which factors are driving the overall average decline in the global gender gap score. The analysis results show that this year’s decline is mainly caused by a reversal in performance on the Political Empowerment gap.
Global Trends and Outcomes:
– Globally, this year, i.e., 2021, the average distance completed to gender parity gap is 68% (This means that the remaining gender gap to close stands at 32%) a step back compared to 2020 (-0.6 percentage points). These figures are mainly driven by a decline in the performance of large countries. On its current trajectory, it will now take 135.6 years to close the gender gap worldwide.
– The gender gap in Political Empowerment remains the largest of the four gaps tracked, with only 22% closed to date, having further widened since the 2020 edition of the report by 2.4 percentage points. Across the 156 countries covered by the index, women represent only 26.1% of some 35,500 Parliament seats and 22.6% of over 3,400 Ministers worldwide. In 81 countries, there has never been a woman head of State as of January 15, 2021. At the current rate of progress, the World Economic Forum estimates that it will take 145.5 years to attain gender parity in politics.
– The gender gap in Economic Participation and Opportunity remains the second-largest of the four key gaps tracked by the index. According to this year’s index results, 58% of this gap has been closed so far. The gap has seen marginal improvement since the 2020 edition of the report, and as a result, we estimate that it will take another 267.6 years to close.
– Gender gaps in Educational Attainment and Health and Survival are nearly closed. In Educational Attainment, 95% of this gender gap has been closed globally, with 37 countries already attaining gender parity. However, the ‘last mile’ of progress is proceeding slowly. The index estimates that it will take another 14.2 years to close this gap on its current trajectory completely.
In Health and Survival, 96% of this gender gap has been closed, registering a marginal decline since last year (not due to COVID-19), and the time to close this gap remains undefined. For both education and health, while progress is higher than economy and politics in the global data, there are important future implications of disruptions due to the pandemic and continued variations in quality across income, geography, race, and ethnicity.
India-Specific Findings:
India had slipped 28 spots to rank 140 out of the 156 countries covered. The pandemic causing a disproportionate impact on women jeopardizes rolling back the little progress made in the last decades-forcing more women to drop off the workforce and leaving them vulnerable to domestic violence.
India’s poor performance on the Global Gender Gap report card hints at a serious wake-up call and learning lessons from the Nordic region for the Government and policy makers.
Within the 156 countries covered, women hold only 26 percent of Parliamentary seats and 22 percent of Ministerial positions. India, in some ways, reflects this widening gap, where the number of Ministers declined from 23.1 percent in 2019 to 9.1 percent in 2021. The number of women in Parliament stands low at 14.4 percent. In India, the gender gap has widened to 62.5 %, down from 66.8% the previous year.
It is mainly due to women’s inadequate representation in politics, technical and leadership roles, a decrease in women’s labor force participation rate, poor healthcare, lagging female to male literacy ratio, and income inequality.
The gap is the widest on the political empowerment dimension, with economic participation and opportunity being next in line. However, the gap on educational attainment and health and survival has been practically bridged.
India is the third-worst performer among South Asian countries, with Pakistan and Afghanistan trailing and Bangladesh being at the top. The report states that the country fared the worst in political empowerment, regressing from 23.9% to 9.1%.
Its ranking on the health and survival dimension is among the five worst performers. The economic participation and opportunity gap saw a decline of 3% compared to 2020, while India’s educational attainment front is in the 114th position.
India has deteriorated to 51st place from 18th place in 2020 on political empowerment. Still, it has slipped to 155th position from 150th position in 2020 on health and survival, 151st place in economic participation and opportunity from 149th place, and 114th place for educational attainment from 112th.
In 2020 reports, among the 153 countries studied, India is the only country where the economic gender gap of 64.6% is larger than the political gender gap of 58.9%. In 2021 report, among the 156 countries, the economic gender gap of India is 67.4%, 3.8% gender gap in education, 6.3% gap in health and survival, and 72.4% gender gap in political empowerment. In health and survival, the gender gap of the sex ratio at birth is above 9.1%, and healthy life expectancy is almost the same.
Discrimination against women has also been reflected in Health and Survival subindex statistics. With 93.7% of this gap closed to date, India ranks among the bottom five countries in this subindex. The wide sex ratio at birth gaps is due to the high incidence of gender-based sex-selective practices. Besides, more than one in four women has faced intimate violence in her lifetime.The gender gap in the literacy rate is above 20.1%.
Yet, gender gaps persist in literacy : one-third of women are illiterate (34.2%) than 17.6% of men. In political empowerment, globally, women in Parliament is at 128th position and gender gap of 83.2%, and 90% gap in a Ministerial position. The gap in wages equality for similar work is above 51.8%. On health and survival, four large countries Pakistan, India, Vietnam, and China, fare poorly, with millions of women there not getting the same access to health as men.
The pandemic has only slowed down in its tracks the progress India was making towards achieving gender parity. The country urgently needs to focus on “health and survival,” which points towards a skewed sex ratio because of the high incidence of gender-based sex-selective practices and women’s economic participation. Women’s labour force participation rate and the share of women in technical roles declined in 2020, reducing the estimated earned income of women, one-fifth of men.
Learning from the Nordic region, noteworthy participation of women in politics, institutions, and public life is the catalyst for transformational change. Women need to be equal participants in the labour force to pioneer the societal changes the world needs in this integral period of transition.
Every effort must be directed towards achieving gender parallelism by facilitating women in leadership and decision-making positions. Social protection programmes should be gender-responsive and account for the differential needs of women and girls. Research and scientific literature also provide unequivocal evidence that countries led by women are dealing with the pandemic more effectively than many others.
Gendered inequality, thereby, is a global concern. India should focus on targeted policies and earmarked public and private investments in care and equalized access. Women are not ready to wait for another century for equality. It’s time India accelerates its efforts and fight for an inclusive, equal, global recovery.
India will not fully develop unless both women and men are equally supported to reach their full potential. There are risks, violations, and vulnerabilities women face just because they are women. Most of these risks are directly linked to women’s economic, political, social, and cultural disadvantages in their daily lives. It becomes acute during crises and disasters.
With the prevalence of gender discrimination, and social norms and practices, women become exposed to the possibility of child marriage, teenage pregnancy, child domestic work, poor education and health, sexual abuse, exploitation, and violence. Many of these manifestations will not change unless women are valued more.
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]2021 WEF Global Gender Gap report, which confirmed its 2016 finding of a decline in worldwide progress towards gender parity.
Over 2.8 billion women are legally restricted from having the same choice of jobs as men. As many as 104 countries still have laws preventing women from working in specific jobs, 59 countries have no laws on sexual harassment in the workplace, and it is astonishing that a handful of countries still allow husbands to legally stop their wives from working.
Globally, women’s participation in the labour force is estimated at 63% (as against 94% of men who participate), but India’s is at a dismal 25% or so currently. Most women are in informal and vulnerable employment—domestic help, agriculture, etc—and are always paid less than men.
Recent reports from Assam suggest that women workers in plantations are paid much less than men and never promoted to supervisory roles. The gender wage gap is about 24% globally, and women have lost far more jobs than men during lockdowns.
The problem of gender disparity is compounded by hurdles put up by governments, society and businesses: unequal access to social security schemes, banking services, education, digital services and so on, even as a glass ceiling has kept leadership roles out of women’s reach.
Yes, many governments and businesses had been working on parity before the pandemic struck. But the global gender gap, defined by differences reflected in the social, political, intellectual, cultural and economic attainments or attitudes of men and women, will not narrow in the near future without all major stakeholders working together on a clear agenda—that of economic growth by inclusion.
The WEF report estimates 135 years to close the gap at our current rate of progress based on four pillars: educational attainment, health, economic participation and political empowerment.
India has slipped from rank 112 to 140 in a single year, confirming how hard women were hit by the pandemic. Pakistan and Afghanistan are the only two Asian countries that fared worse.
Here are a few things we must do:
One, frame policies for equal-opportunity employment. Use technology and artificial intelligence to eliminate biases of gender, caste, etc, and select candidates at all levels on merit. Numerous surveys indicate that women in general have a better chance of landing jobs if their gender is not known to recruiters.
Two, foster a culture of gender sensitivity. Take a review of current policies and move from gender-neutral to gender-sensitive. Encourage and insist on diversity and inclusion at all levels, and promote more women internally to leadership roles. Demolish silos to let women grab potential opportunities in hitherto male-dominant roles. Work-from-home has taught us how efficiently women can manage flex-timings and productivity.
Three, deploy corporate social responsibility (CSR) funds for the education and skilling of women and girls at the bottom of the pyramid. CSR allocations to toilet building, the PM-Cares fund and firms’ own trusts could be re-channelled for this.
Four, get more women into research and development (R&D) roles. A study of over 4,000 companies found that more women in R&D jobs resulted in radical innovation. It appears women score far higher than men in championing change. If you seek growth from affordable products and services for low-income groups, women often have the best ideas.
Five, break barriers to allow progress. Cultural and structural issues must be fixed. Unconscious biases and discrimination are rampant even in highly-esteemed organizations. Establish fair and transparent human resource policies.
Six, get involved in local communities to engage them. As Michael Porter said, it is not possible for businesses to sustain long-term shareholder value without ensuring the welfare of the communities they exist in. It is in the best interest of enterprises to engage with local communities to understand and work towards lowering cultural and other barriers in society. It will also help connect with potential customers, employees and special interest groups driving the gender-equity agenda and achieve better diversity.