Measuring Socio-Economic GENDER Inequality: Toward an Alternative to the UNDP Gender-Related Development Index

By A. G. Dijkstra, Lucia C. Hanmer. 2000

274 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Development, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d75fac0e0f993b95f7fbfa09ce5041b6d996753f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Development

1. A. Dijkstra
2. S. Chant
3. P. Panda
4. N. Folbre
5. B. Agarwal
6. N. Kabeer
7. Luisa Natali

In Safety Research

1. S. Chant
2. B. Agarwal
3. P. Panda
4. A. Dijkstra
5. N. Folbre
6. Cheryl R. Doss
7. Rachel Heath
8. Irene van Staveren

Citations in the corpus

• Revisiting UNDP's GDI and GEM: Towards an Alternative (2002, methodology): “A final remark which holds for both GDI and GEM is that the procedure of taking the harmonic mean of female and male scores punishes for inequality no matter whether female scores are lower or higher than male scores (see also Dijkstra and Hanmer, 2000).”
• Measuring Women's Empowerment: An assessment of the Gender-related Development Index and the Gender Empowerment Measure (2003, background): “An intriguing issue is that the GDI as computed in this way punishes for gender inequality irrespective of whether female score (e.g. in education in certain countries) may be higher than male scores, as only the gap between the sexes is seen to matter (Dijkstra and Hanmer, 2000).”
• Toward Freedom from Domestic Violence: The Neglected Obvious (2007, background): “2 See also, Nussbaum (2005) and Dijkstra and Hanmer (2000).”
• Marital Violence, Human Development and Women's Property Status in India (2005, background): “See also, Dijkstra and Hanmer (2000), who point to the need to expand the measures of human development, by including additional indicators such as violence against women and Nussbaum (2003) who lists ‘‘bodily integrity’’ (freedom from assault, domestic violence, etc.) as a central human capability…”
• Measuring Care: Gender, Empowerment, and the Care Economy (2006, background): “Many observers have pointed to the limitations of these measures, proposing additional indices such as a Gender Equity Index (Social Watch, 2005) or a Relative Status of Women as supplements (Dijkstra and Hanmer, 2000).”
• Re‐thinking the “Feminization of Poverty” in Relation to Aggregate Gender Indices (2006, background): “8 For important discussions of other conceptual and empirical problems with income in the GDI and GEM, see Bardhan and Klasen (1999), Charmes and Wieringa (2003), Dijkstra and Hanmer (2000), and Klasen (2004).”