ListMoto - Gender-related Development Index

--- Advertisement ---

The Gender Development Index (GDI) is an index designed to measure of gender equality. GDI together with the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) were introduced in 1995 in the Human Development Report
Human Development Report
written by the United Nations Development Program. The aim of these measurements was to add a gender-sensitive dimension to the Human Development Index
Human Development Index
(HDI). The first measurement that they created as a result was the Gender-related Development Index (GDI). The GDI is defined as a "distribution-sensitive measure that accounts for the human development impact of existing gender gaps in the three components of the HDI" (Klasen 243). Distribution sensitive means that the GDI takes into account not only the averaged or general level of well-being and wealth within a given country, but focuses also on how this wealth and well-being is distributed between different groups within society. The HDI and the GDI (as well as the GEM) were created to rival the more traditional general income-based measures of development such as gross domestic product (GDP) and gross national product (GNP).[1]


1 Definition and calculation 2 Controversies

2.1 General debates 2.2 Debates surrounding the life expectancy adjustment 2.3 Debates surrounding income gaps

3 Suggested alternatives 4 See also 5 References

Definition and calculation[edit] The GDI is often considered a “gender-sensitive extension of the HDI” (Klasen 245). It addresses gender-gaps in life expectancy, education, and incomes. It uses an “inequality aversion” penalty, which creates a development score penalty for gender gaps in any of the categories of the Human Development Index
Human Development Index
which include life expectancy, adult literacy, school enrollment, and logarithmic transformations of per-capita income. In terms of life expectancy, the GDI assumes that women will live an average of five years longer than men. Additionally, in terms of income, the GDI considers income-gaps in terms of actual earned income.[1] The GDI cannot be used independently from the Human Development Index
Human Development Index
(HDI) score and so, it cannot be used on its own as an indicator of gender-gaps. Only the gap between the HDI and the GDI can actually be accurately considered; the GDI on its own is not an independent measure of gender-gaps.[2] Controversies[edit] General debates[edit] In the years since its creation in 1995, much debate has arisen surrounding the reliability, and usefulness of the Gender Development Index (GDI) in making adequate comparisons between different countries and in promoting gender-sensitive development. The GDI is particularly criticized for being often mistakenly interpreted as an independent measure of gender-gaps when it is not, in fact, intended to be interpreted in that way, because it can only be used in combination with the scores from the Human Development Index, but not on its own. Additionally, the data that is needed in order to calculate the GDI is not always readily available in many countries, making the measure very hard to calculate uniformly and internationally. There is also worry that the combination of so many different developmental influences in one measurement could result in muddled results and that perhaps the GDI (and the GEM) actually hide more than they reveal.[1] Debates surrounding the life expectancy adjustment[edit] More specifically, there has been a lot of debate over the life-expectancy component of the Gender-related Development Index (GDI). As was mentioned previously, the GDI life expectancy section is adjusted to assume that women will live, normally, five years longer than men. This provision has been debated, and it has been argued that if the GDI was really looking to promote true equality, it would strive to attain the same life-expectancy for women and men, despite what might be considered a biological advantage or not. However, this may seem paradoxical in terms of policy implications, because, theoretically, this could only be achieved through providing preferential treatment to males, effectively discriminating against females. Furthermore, it has been argued that the GDI doesn’t account for sex-selective abortion, meaning that the penalty levied against a country for gender inequality is less because it affects less of the population (see Sen, Missing Women).[1] Debates surrounding income gaps[edit] Another area of debate surrounding the Gender-related Development Index (GDI) is in the area of income gaps. The GDI considers income-gaps in terms of actual earned income. This has been said to be problematic because often, men may make more money than women, but their income is shared. Additionally, the GDI has been criticized because it does not consider the value of care work as well as other work performed in the informal sector (such as cleaning, cooking, housework, and childcare). Another criticism of the GDI is that it only takes gender into account as a factor for inequality, it does not, however, consider inequality among class, region or race, which could be very significant.[1] Another criticism with the income-gap portion of the GDI is that it is heavily dependent on gross domestic product (GDP) and gross national product (GNP). For most countries, the earned-income gap accounts for more than 90% of the gender penalty. Suggested alternatives[edit] As was suggested by Halis Akder in 1994, one alternative to the Gender-related Development Index would be the calculation of a separate male and female Human Development Index
Human Development Index
(HDI). Another suggested alternative is the Gender Gap Measure which could be interpreted directly as a measure of gender inequality, instead of having to be compared to the Human Development Index
Human Development Index
(HDI) as the GDI is. It would average the female-male gaps in human development and use a gender-gap in labor force participation instead of earned income. In the 2010 Human Development Report, another alternative to the Gender-related Development Index (GDI), namely, the Gender Inequality Index (GII) was proposed in order to address some of the shortcomings of the GDI. This new experimental measure contains three dimensions: Reproductive Health, Empowerment, and Labor Market Participation.[2] See also[edit]


American Human Development Report Bhutan GNH Index Broad measures of economic progress Disability-adjusted life year Economics Full cost accounting Gender Parity Index Genuine Progress Indicator
Genuine Progress Indicator
(GPI) Global Peace Index Green gross domestic product
Green gross domestic product
(Green GDP) Green national product Gross National Happiness Gross National Well-being (GNW) Happiness economics Happy Planet Index
Happy Planet Index
(HPI) Human Development Index
Human Development Index
(HDI) Human Poverty
Index ISEW (Index of sustainable economic welfare) Law of Social Cycle Legatum Prosperity Index Leisure satisfaction Living planet index Millennium Development Goals
Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs) Money-rich, time-poor National Human Development Report OECD Better Life Index BLI Post-materialism Progress (history) Progressive utilization theory Psychometrics Subjective life satisfaction Where-to-be-born Index Wikiprogress World Happiness Report
World Happiness Report
(WHR) World Values Survey (WVS)


^ a b c d e Klasen S. UNDP's Gender-Related Measures: Some Conceptual Problems and Possible Solutions. Journal of Human Development [serial online]. July 2006;7(2):243-274. Available from: EconLit with Full Text, Ipswich, MA. Accessed September 26, 2011. ^ a b Klasen, Stephan1; Schuler, Dana. Reforming the Gender-Related Development Index and the Gender Empowerment Measure: Implementing Some Specific Proposals. Feminist Economics. January 2011 (1) 1 - 30

v t e

Deprivation and poverty indicators



Social exclusion Social vulnerability Relative deprivation Disadvantaged Fushūgaku Hikikomori Social determinants of health in poverty


Social Progress Index



psychological poverty Poverty
and mental health Social and psychological value of money



Energy poverty Money-rich, time-poor Poverty
threshold Secondary poverty Asset poverty Housing stress Income deficit Survival sex Debt bondage


Below Poverty
Line (India) Homeless Vulnerability Index Misery index (economics) Gini coefficient Genuine progress indicator
Genuine progress indicator
(GPI) Legatum Prosperity Index Poverty
gap index



and Violence Disability and poverty Food insecurity


India State Hunger Index Global Hunger Index Disability-adjusted life year
Disability-adjusted life year
(DALYs) Global Peace Index
Global Peace Index

Complex measures

Human Poverty Index (HPI) Human Development Index
Human Development Index
(HDI) Multidimensional Poverty
Index (MPI) Physical Quality of Life Index (PQLI) Laeken indicators (EU) Scottish index of multiple deprivation Townsend deprivation index Living Planet Index
Living Planet Index
(LPI) Progress out of Poverty



Feminization of poverty


Gender-related Development Index (GDI) Gender Parity Index


Theories of poverty Well-being Welfare Wellness Quality of Life Self-perceived quality-of-life scale Subjective well-being
Subjective well-being
(SWB) Suboptimal health Stress Rural access issues Providing Urban Amenities to Rural Areas Post-materialism Pen's parade

v t e

Diseases of poverty

Diseases of poverty

AIDS Malaria Tuberculosis Measles Pneumonia Diarrheal diseases

Neglected diseases

Cholera Chagas disease African sleeping sickness Schistosomiasis Dracunculiasis River blindness Leishmaniasis Trachoma


Malnutrition Priority review voucher

v t e

Indices of Deprivation

National (general deprivation)

Carstairs index Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000 (IMD2000) Indices of deprivation 2004 (ID2004) Indices of deprivation 2007 (ID2007) Indices of deprivation 2010 (ID2010)

National (subject specific deprivation)

Underprivileged area score Department of Environment Index

Environment portal Category Com