Gender Inequality, Development and Dependence in Third World Nations

Development, Dependence, and Gender Inequality in the Third World
Author(s): Susan E. Marshall

Source: International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 2 (Jun., 1985), pp. 217-240
Published by: Wiley on behalf of The International Studies Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2600507 .
Accessed: 12/06/2014 13:51
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Wiley and The International Studies Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to International Studies Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Studies
International (1985) 29, 217-240
Quarterly
Development, Dependence, and Gender

Inequality in the Third World
SUSAN E. MARSHALL
of Texas at Austin
University
While therehas been much recentempiricalinvestigation of the relationship

betweeneconomicdevelopment, dependence,and incomeinequality,theissue
of genderinequalityhas receivedless systematicattention.This exploratory
studyis a cross-sectionalinvestigation of the effects and
of industrialization
investment,debt, and export dependencyon levels of female education,
and on rates of female economic participation,both absolutely and
relativeto male rates in 60 less-developedcountries.Althoughsome of the
macroeconomic indicatorsemergeas significant predictorsofgenderinequality
in severaloftheregression equations,themostimportantexplanatoryvariable
is culturalregion.These findingsfailto lend strongempiricalsupportto either
themodernization or thedependency/world-system theoretical The
perspective.
concludingdiscussionspeculateson theinterpretation of the researchfindings,
offerssomeobservations on theconceptualdistinctions betweenclassand gender
and suggestssomedirections
stratification, forfutureresearch.
Introduction
While the causes and consequences of social change have long engaged the interestof
social theorists, recent consideration of the dilemma of Third World under-
development has sharpened the debate into two contrastingtheoretical perspectives.
Modernization theory, based upon structural-functionalism, generally characterizes
nations as more or less modern according to theirdegree of industrialization (Parsons,
1960; Inkeles and Smith, 1974; Moore, 1979). This view assertsa historicalcontinuity
between the development experiences of the so-called modern and traditional
societies, and views contact with the wealthy Western nations as beneficial through
the diffusionof resources such as capital, technology,knowledge, and cultural values
(Banfield, 1958; Lerner, 1958; Hagen, 1963; Hunter, 1969). Dependency or world-
system theory, in contrast, following in the Marxist tradition, argues that the
industrialized West can not represent the future of Third World societies because
underdevelopmentis a necessaryconsequence of worldwide capitalist expansion. This
expansion promotes class alliances between core and periphery which distort the
process of indigenous development and retard self-sustaininggrowth by maintaining
note:I would like to thankWilliamJ. Goode, Robert L. Kaufman,Susan Tiano, and four
Author's
forhelpfulsuggestions
anonymousreviewers on earlierversionsofthispaper.
0217-24$03.00 ? 1985International
0020-8833/85102 StudiesAssociation

218 Development, andGender
Dependence, Inequality
core control of valued resources (Lenin, 1939; Sweezy, 1942; Baran, 1957; Dos Santos,
1970; Amin, 1974; Wallerstein, 1974, 1979, 1980; Frank, 1979). According to this
perspective,the internal structureof Third World societies is stronglyinfluenced by
their dependent position in the world capitalist system.While the findingsare by no
means conclusive, empirical research does tend to support the hypothesis that
financial dependence retards long-term economic growth and exacerbates income
inequality within Third World societies (Chase-Dunn, 1975; Rubinson, 1976;
Bornschier et al., 1978; Bornschier and Ballmer-Cao, 1979; for a differentview, see
Delacroix, 1977).
While much attention has been given to the general question of social inequality
withinThird World nations, the issue of gender inequality typicallyhas been ignored
by the development literature,although thisgap has been partially filledby numerous
excellent case-studies.' This exploratory study representsan initial effortat such a
systematiccross-national assessment of the effectsof industrialization and economic
dependency on gender inequality in 60 Third World nations. I firstsuggest some
hypotheseswhich emerge froma literaturereview of both theoreticalperspectivesand
then test these hypotheses, using regression analyses to compare the relative
contributions of levels of national economic development and dependence for
predicting female rates of education and labor force participation as well as the
sectoral distributionof female employment. In addition, a sex ratio is presented for
each measure of achievement, allowing us to compare the predictive utilityof these
contrastingtheoriesof social change for explaining national variations in the gender
gap in education and employment.The effectsof culture on gender inequality are also
examined, using dummy variables forgeographic region. The goals of thisresearch are
(1) to provide,comparative data on the general condition of women in less-developed
societies, (2) to posit an association between societal development and female status in
order to better integrategender into the study of development, and (3) to offersome
tentativeobservationsconcerningthe conceptual distinctionbetween class and gender
stratification.
Contrasting Perspectives on Gender Inequality and Development

Although neither modernization nor dependency/world-systemtheory has devoted
extensiveattentionto the issue of women's status,hypothesesconcerningthe impact of
development on gender inequality can be derived from discussions of qualitative
changes in social structure and personality configuration. In particular, both
perspectives implicitly link political and economic inequality with that of gender.
Moreover, recentfeministresearch has begun to build upon mainstreamdevelopment
theory(see Hartmann, 1976; Elliott, 1977; Tiano, 1981).
According to proponents of modernization theory, the diffusion of Western
technologyto the less-developed countries profoundlyimproves the traditional social
structure,liberating women from the bondage of the patriarchal extended family,
restrictivereligious beliefs, and tedious agricultural labor. These changes occur
because the functional requisites of industrialization precipitate society's evolution
toward increasing differentiation,specialization, and integration(Parson.s,1960, 1971;
Smelser, 1966; Smelser and Lipset, 1966). Societal progress toward political
democracy, class fluidity, and gender equality is facilitated by the shift from
particularisticto universalisticnorms, diffuseto specificrole-orientations,affectiveto
rational attitudinal structures, and ascriptive to achievement status placement

SUSAN E. MARSHALL 219
(Lerner, 1958; McClelland, 1961; Inkeles and Smith, 1974; O'Connell, 1976). In
particular,women's statusimprovesvia educational expansion, increased employment
opportunities, and a reduction in family size facilitated by urbanization, class
mobility,and modern contraceptivetechnology (Klein, 1963/64;Giele, 1972; Shorter,
1975; Wells, 1976).
Contrastingtraditional and modern society,this perspectivegenerally hypothesizes
a positive relationship between level of economic development and rates of female
educational attainment and labor force participation (at least for wage workers), as
well as a shiftfromfemale agricultural to industrial employmentas industrialization
proceeds (see Wilensky, 1968). Since the historical experience of Western women is
viewed as progresstoward increasing equality with men, the active interventionof the
developed nations through foreignaid and investmentis presumed to have the same
positive effecton women's status in the less-developed countries (Levy, 1949; Goode,
1963; Patai, 1967). Moreover, both development and Westernization are assumed to
narrow the gender gap in achievements in these areas, resulting in greater parity
between the statusesof males and females.
Recent feministanalyses of developed Western societies have overtly challenged
these optimisticassertionsofmodernization theory.Historical investigationdocuments
the withdrawal of women from productive labor as Western industrialization
proceeded due in part to improvementsin earnings of male breadwinners and the
limitationsplaced on female employment by the separation of home and workplace
(Oakley, 1974; Ryan, 1975; Tilly and Scott, 1978).2 Some researchers (e.g., Iglitzin,
1976; Hareven, 1978: 68-69) suggest that the isolation of the modern nuclear family,
due to the limitations placed on female mobility by the erosion of kinship support
networks, renders it a less egalitarian institution than the traditional extended
form.According to this view, the persistenceof gender inequality in modern Western
societyis manifestedin lower rates of female employmentrelative to males and a sex-
stratifiedlabor market which maintains female subordination to male breadwinners.
Indeed, despite dramatic increases in femalelabor forceparticipation during the latter
stages of industrialization,employed Western women are still clustered in low-status
poorly paid clerical and service occupations (Myrdal and Klein, 1956; Oppenheimer,
1970; Blau, 1979).
A more radical feminist approach extends dependency theory's critique that
Western capitalist penetration retards long-term economic growth, political demo-
cracy, and quality of life in less-developed societies, arguing that dependent
development also exacerbates gender inequality. According to thisradical perspective,
the subsequent expansion of the cash economy frequentlyrecruitsmales while leaving
females to labor in subsistence production where they are denied opportunities for
upward mobility and independence from patriarchal control (Bossen, 1975; Van
Allen, 1976; Arizpe, 1977; Jelin, 1977).3 The distortion of the peripheral economy
precipitated by dependent development affectsall workers, but the restrictionof
employment opportunities particularly displaces women, who function as a reserve
army of labor, most commonly as casual workersin the overcrowded tertiarysector
(Saffiotti,1975; Leon de Leal and Deere, 1979). The causal chain linking the various
typesof economic dependency with gender inequality remains unspecified,however.
In order to posit some guiding hypothesesconcerning these relationships,I borrow
from previous empirical research indicating that investment, debt, and export
dependence increase income inequality (Rubinson, 1976; Bornschieretal., 1978; Stokes
and Jaffee,1982; Fiala, 1983). While the process by which thisoccurs remains a matter

220 Development, and GenderInequality
Dependence,
of lively scholarly debate (see Bornschier and Ballmer-Cao, 1979; Evans and
Timberlake, 1980; Fiala, 1983), the general thesis is that the adoption of capital-
intensive techniques and the repatriation of profitsby foreigninvestors (investment
dependence), the drain ofscarce capital by high external debt (debt dependence), and
the restriction of control over production and income caused by exporters'
vulnerability to the vicissitudes of the world market (export dependence) cause
uneven development. This is characterized typically by a small industrial enclave
surrounded by a large informalsector in the cities and a proletarianized peasantry in
the countryside, pressured by declining employment opportunities as a result of
mechanization and periodic production restrictionsdesigned to drive up the prices of
primary products on the world market. Income inequality between the educated,
economically secure 'labor aristocracy' in the small but more remunerativeindustrial
sectorand the masses is thus increased (Arrighi,1970).
Extrapolating fromfeministresearch in the less-developed areas, the employment
squeeze resulting from dependency may be expected to have a more deleterious
impact on women than on men. Two divergent hypotheses have been proposed to
explain the relationship between economic dependence and gender differencesin
overall labor force participation. In the first,the resulting labor crisis may be
alleviated throughthe transferof the female reservearmy of labor out of waged work
entirelyor into the informal sector where their labor may go largely unrecorded,
preservingthe economic security of the male labor force who constitute a greater
potentialthreatto the statusquo (Bossen, 1975; Van Allen, 1976; Beneria, 1982). In the
second, the pauperization of the masses necessitatesfemale entrance into wage labor as
a strategyof pooling resourcesforfamilysurvival, particularlyin the agricultural and
servicesectors(Jelin,1977; Leon de Leal and Deere, 1979; Sen, 1982). In eithercase, a
connection between the processes of gender and class inequality is proposed.
Moreover, there is considerable agreement concerning the effectsof economic
dependence on the sectoral distributionof employment,particularly concerning the
increasing concentration of women in service employment (Arizpe, 1977; Young,
1982). In addition, it is proposed that the market expansion of factory-produced
consumption items destroys domestic manufacturing, often a traditionally female
enterprise (Young, 1982). Hence, I hypothesize that economic dependence varies
positivelywith the numbersof women employed in the agriculturaland servicesectors
and with the ratio of women to men participatingin these sectors. I also hypothesize
that economic dependence varies negativelywith female employmentin the industrial
sector and with the equality of educational opportunity,given that crises in capital
accumulation constrainfamilyand governmentresources,thus favoringthe education
of males over females. Economic dependence thus mitigates the anticipated effectsof
economic development on gender equality.
Methodology
In thisanalysis I testthese hypothesesby means of cross-sectionalregressionanalysis of
60 less-developed countries with per capita Gross National Products (GNPs) of less
than $1000 in 1970.4 By continent,these include 21 countriesfromLatin America, 20
fromAfrica, 16 fromAsia, and the remainder fromEurope (see Appendix I). These
countriesdo not representa random sample, but constitutethose cases forwhich data
are available on every variable under examination. Hence, tests of statistical
significanceare of limited utility,but are included as a rough guide to the relative

magnitude of regressioncoefficients.All data are collected forthe year 1970, with the
exception of those variables, as noted, which are averaged forthe period 1966-1967 to
1970 to smooth out annual fluctuations.
The dependent variables represent key indicators of women's educational and
economic status and gender inequality. Women's educational achievements are
measured as thefemalesecondary educationlevel,expressed as a percentage of the eligible
females in the appropriate age-group (11-16 years). This variable represents the
acquisition of skills necessary for participation in the public domain. These data are
drawn fromthe Unesco StatisticalYearbook(1980).
Women's economic status, operationalized as the level of remunerated female
economic activity, measures the total female wage labor force participation.5 The
female laborforceparticipationlevel is expressed as a percentage of the total female
population in each country. The source for these data is the International Labour
Office,Labour Force Estimatesand Projections,1950-2000 (1977).6 Total female labor
force participation is divided into agriculture,industry,and servicesectors, according to
the International Standard Industrial Classification.7These three sectoral variables
allow us to assess differencesin the structureof the female labor force by degrees of
development and dependency. In particular, we are interestedin testinghypotheses
concerning the employment of women in service versus industrial sectors, a pattern
which, for the aggregate labor force, has been empirically associated with income
inequality in Third World nations (Evans and Timberlake, 1980; Kentor, 1981; Fiala,
1983).
Gender inequality in each country is measured by means of sex ratios, which are
constructedfor each indicator of educational and economic statusjust discussed. Sex
ratiosrepresent the levels of female achievement expressed as a percentage of male
levels for each category. A sex ratio of 100 indicates parity between the sexes, and
deviations below (or above) 100 may be interpretedin termsof the degree of male (or
female) advantage on that measure.8
The analysis firstregressesfemale attainmentand participation levels and sex ratios
on economic development level,measured by per capita energy consumption in kilograms
of coal equivalents. This is a widely used measure of overall economic development,
and has the advantage of easier cross-national interpretationthan GNP per capita,
which is more sensitiveto fluctuationsin currencyexchange and inflationrates.9Log-
transformedvalues are used because of the skewed distributionof this variable. These
data are drawn fromthe StatisticalYearbook,1974 (United Nations, 1975).
The dependency variables are then included in the regressionequations to assess
theirrelative power forpredictinginter-countrydifferences in female educational and
economic status and gender inequality. Three variables are used to represent
empiricallydistinctdimensions of dependency.'0 Investment which measures
dependence,
the extentof profitsmade by directforeigninvestmentin the host country,is measured
by the total debits on investment income as a percentage of the Gross Domestic
Product (GDP). This 'flow' measure of investment dependence (see Evans and
Timberlake, 1980: 535) is averaged for the years 1966-1970 to smooth out annual
fluctuations.It is derived fromthe International Monetary Fund's Balance of Payments
Yearbook(1973). Debt dependence is measured by the total external public debt as a
percentage of GDP, averaged forthe years 1967-1970. It measures the degree of state
financial autonomy within the world-system. These data are derived from the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, WorldTables (1976)." The
third variable, exportdependence, representsthe degree to which the structureof Third

222 Development, andGender
Dependence, Inequality
World trade is oriented toward exports to the wealthy capitalist countries,argued to

be the basis forcontrol over production and prices (see Emmanuel, 1972; Amin, 1976;
Stokes and Jaffee,1982). This variable is operationalized as the average total value of
exports to the developed market economies as a percentage of the GDP between 1967
and 1970, as reportedin the UN YearbookofInternational Trade Statistics(1974).
Data Analysis
The EffectsofEconomicDevelopment
on GenderInequality
Table 1 presentsthe resultsof bivariate regressionanalyses of female educational and
economic status on economic development level. As Table 1 indicates, advancements
in economic development are associated with increases in female secondary
enrollmentsand decreases in female labor force participation. Empirical support for
modernization theoryamong Third World countriesis thus mixed. The resultsof this
cross-sectional analysis suggest that economic development provides resources
necessary for the expansion of female secondary education, but also restrictsfemale
employment,as predicted by some criticsof the modernization perspective.
TABLE ofenergyconsumption
1. Effects per capita on femaleparticipation
levels(N = 60).
Dependent
Variables
Female Female % oftheFemaleLaborForceEmployed

in:
Independent Secondary Labor
Variables Education Force Agriculture Industry Service
Energy 9.318a** -3.417** -16.422** 3.291 ** 13.131**

Consumption (1.409)b (1.275) (3.005) (1.119) (2.454)
Per Capita 0.656c -3.32 -0.583 0.360 0.575
(log trans-
formed)
RI 0.43 0.11 0.34 0.13 0.33
aUnstandardized regressioncoefficient.
bStandarderrorofcoefficient.
cStandardizedregression coefficient.
at 0.05; **significant
*Significant at 0.01.
Note:The meansand standarddeviationsofthevariablesappear in AppendixII.
Concerning the structure of the female labor force, examination of Table 1

suggeststhat advances in economic development predict decreases in the percentage of
employed females in agriculture and increases in female industrial and service
employment. It appears that countries with higher levels of economic development
experience lower female labor force participation rates, a relative decline of female
employmentin agriculture,and a relative increase in female service (and secondarily
industrial) employment. Since previous research has found a positive relationship
between service sector employment and income inequality in the less-developed
countries (Evans and Timberlake, 1980; Fiala, 1983), these findingschallenge the
assertion of modernization theory that economic development ameliorates women's

inferior economic status, although the absence of occupational or income data

precludes a more definitiveconclusion concerning the relative well being of female
industrial compared to service workers.
TABLE 2. of energyconsumptionper capita on educationand employment

Effects sex ratios
(N = 60).
Variables
Dependent
SexRatio SexRatio SexRatioofEmployment

in:
Variable Education Force Agriculture Industry Service
Energy 12.155a** - 5.045* -9.218 -9.703 21.441

Consumption (2.922)b (2.334) (5.123) (6.557) (13.195)
Per Capita 0.479 - 0.273 -0.230 -0.191 0.209
(log trans-
formed)
RI 0.23 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.04
aUnstandardizedregression coefficient.
Table 2 investigatesmore directlythe relationship between economic development

level and gender inequality. It reports the results of regressingsex ratios on energy
consumption per capita. The findingsindicate that economic development is related
not only to absolute increases in female secondary education enrollments,but also to a
reduction of the sex gap. Conversely, economic development is associated both with
decreased female labor forceparticipation and an increasing male advantage relative
to females. None of the coefficientsfor sex ratios by sector is sufficientlylarge to
approach significance.Comparing the R2s of Tables 1 and 2, economic development
level explains considerably more of the variance in national rates of female
educational and economic participation than in gender differencesin these rates (sex
ratios).
The EffectsofDependent on GenderInequality

Development
I next investigate the effectof economic dependence on gender inequality. Tables 3
and 4 present the resultsof regressingeach of the 10 dependent variables on energy
consumption per capita and measures of investment,debt, and export dependency.
As Table 3 indicates, the inclusion of the dependency variables strengthensthe
effectsof economic development on female participation rates. The relationship
between energy consumption and gender equality remains positive in education and
negative in labor-force participation. Energy consumption remains the most
important explanatory variable, and the addition of the three dependency indicators
to the regressionequations adds little to the proportion of the variance explained, as
the adjusted R2s indicate.'2

Dependence,
TABLE 3. Effectsof energyconsumptionper capita and dependencyon femaleparticipation

levels (N = 60).
DependentVariables
% of theFemaleLabor Force
Female Female Employedin:
Energy 10.808a** - 3.744** - 16.955** 3.793** 13.162**

Consumption (1.553)b (1.426) (3.461) (1.233) (2.874)
Per Capita 0.761c -0.364 -0.602 0.415 0.576
(log trans-
formed)
Debitson - 1.832* -0.873 - 1.188 0.689 0.498
Investment (0.783) (0.719) (1.745) (0.621) (1.448)
Income -0.301 -0.198 -0.098 0.176 0.051
External -0.142 -0.195 -0.053 0.096 -0.043

Public (0.137) (0.126) (0.305) (0.109) (0.253)
Debt -0.102 -0.193 -0.019 0.108 -0.019
Exportsto 0.098 0.346* 0.609 - 0.388** -0.221

Developed (0.180) (0.165) (0.400) (0.143) (0.332)
Market 0.066 0.323 0.208 -0.407 -0.093
Economies
R2 (adjusted) 0.46 0.14 0.32 0.18 0.29
aUnstandardized coefficient.
regression
There are, however, some significantcoefficientsamong the dependency variables

which merit discussion. Investment dependency is negatively related to female
secondary education rates, and export dependency is associated with a decrease in the
share of women employed in industry.These findingslend empirical support to the
dependency/world-system argument that Third World exports tend to specialize in
raw materials production, which has limited spin-offeffectsforindustrialdevelopment
(Galtung, 1971; Amin, 1976; Frank, 1979). On the other hand, exports to the
developed market economies are also associated with an increase in female labor force
participation,lending support to the 'pauperization' thesisproposed by some feminist
scholars, (Jelin, 1977; Leon de Leal and Deere, 1979; Sen, 1982) working within the
dependency perspective. Note also the countervailing effectsof energy consumption
and export dependency on female labor-forceparticipation rates and female industrial
employment.Debt dependency, however, has no predictive utilityfor any of the five
dependent variables. The findingsof this table thus offerlimited support for each of
the theoreticalperspectivesunder consideration.
Table 4 demonstratesthat the power of development and dependency indicatorsfor
predictingnational variations in education and employmentsex ratios continues to be

poor. As the low adjusted R2s indicate, by including the threedependency variables in
the regression equations, generally little is added to the proportion of variance
explained. Moreover, the original independent variable, energy consumption per
capita, gains strength as a predictor of increasing gender equality in secondary
education and decreasing equality in labor-forceparticipation sex ratios.
TABLE 4. Effects per capita and dependencyon sex ratios(N = 60).

ofenergyconsumption
DependentVariables
Sex Ratio Sex Ratio Sex Ratio ofEmployment

in:
Energy 15.437a** -5.678* -7.806 -8.567 20.175

Consumption (3.235)b (2.610) (5.678) (7.326) (15.491)
Per Capita 0.609C -0.307 -0.195 -0.168 1.696
(log trans-
formed)
Debits on -4.047* -1.557 -6.037* 5.321 3.261
Investment (1.630) (1.316) (2.862) (3.647) (7.808)
Income -0.372 0.197 -0.351 0.244 0.074
External -0.177 -0.373 -0.563 0.236 0.306

Public (0.285) (0.230) (0.501) (0.638) (1.366)
Debt -0.071 -0.206 -0.144 0.047 0.030
Exports to 0.289 0.621* 1.502* -2.291* -0.634

Developed (0.374) (0.302) (0.657) (0.837) (1.792)
Market 0.110 0.323 0.360 -0.432 0.125
Economies
R2 (adjusted) 0.27 0.10 0.10 0.09 0
aUnstandardizedregression coefficient.
at 0.01.
*Significant
The relationship between economic dependency and sex ratios demonstrates that
investmentdependency is associated with increasing inequality in favor of males in
secondary education and in agricultural employment, perhaps in the latter case
because foreigninvestmentin agriculture is related to the growth of agribusinesses,
which tend to employ male workers (Leon de Leal and Deere, 1979). Exports to the
developed marketeconomies as a percentage of GDP emergesas a consistentpredictor
of increasing female employment. Also, as export dependency increases, the
percentage of women employed in agricultureincreases and the percentage of women
in industry decreases relative to the male distribution by sector. This lends some
empirical support to the hypothesisthat exporting to the wealthy capitalist nations
confinesfemale economic opportunitiesto the labor-intensivesectorsinvolved in raw
materials production. This research also suggests that the effectsof economic

226 Development,
Dependence,
andGender
Inequality
dependency on women's status and gender equality are difficultto generalize, since
theyvary by type of dependency. The hypothesisof dependency/world-system theory
concerning the relationship between dependency, service sector employment, and
inequality continues to receive little empirical support, however, as service
employment demonstrates no significant relationship to any of the dependency
variables.
The EffectsofRegionon GenderInequality

The results of the preceding analysis suggest that macroeconomic conditions of
economic development and dependency are associated with national variations in
female rates of participation and sex ratios, but the proportionof variance explained is
generally not high. Moreover, although the economic development indicator yields
more significantpartial coefficients than the measures of investment,debt, and export
dependency, some of these relationships, such as the negative effectof energy
consumption on gender equality in labor-forceparticipation, are not in the direction
predicted by modernization theory.
An alternative hypothesis is that the effectsof economic development and
dependency on female status and gender inequality are confounded by geographic
region. For example, energy consumption per capita may appear to be related to
female education and economic participation rates because the more developed
countriesare clusteredin one geographic region, such as Latin America, which share
certain cultural norms or technological levels influencingthe division of labor by sex
and women's status (Boserup, 1970; Youssef, 1974). Another possibility is that the
effectsof dependency on gender equality vary by geographic region due to differences
in the intensityand/or structure of capitalist penetration. For example, economic
dependency in Africa may encompass mostly raw materials production, while the
Latin American economy may represent a more developed version of capitalist
accumulation including a larger manufacturing sector, with implications for the
structuresof class and gender.
To control for the influenceof geographic/culturalregion, three dummy variables
are created. These are Latin America (21 cases), Africa (15 cases), and Muslim (11
cases).'3 Asia (9 cases) constitutesthe referencecategory,selected forits intermediate
ranking in economic development indicators compayed to the other regions. Four
countriesdo not fitany of these regional categories and are excluded fromthe analysis
(see Appendix 1). Tables 5 and 6 examine the degree to which these regional
differencesmitigate the relationshipsbetween the original independent variables and
gender inequality.
The resultsof Table 5 indicate that, when region is taken into account, the effectsof
economic development and dependency are substantially reduced. Energy con-
sumption per capita is the only independent variable to retain significantlevels when
dummy variables for region are included in the regressionequations; it continues to
have a strong positive relationship to female secondary education rates. The other
significantpartial coefficientsare all regional dummy variables, and they indicate
stronglydivergentpatternsof female participation rates by region. Muslim nations in
the analysis have significantlylower rates of female secondary education than Asia
(the referencecategory), controllingforthe effectsof the other independent variables.
Compared to the Asian region, levels of female labor-force participation are
significantlylower in the Latin American and Muslim regions, and significantly
higher in the Africanregion. Regional differencesbetween Africa and Latin America

TABLE 5. Effectsof energy consumptionper capita, dependency,and region on female

levels(N = 56).
participation
DependentVariables
% of theFemaleLabor Force
Female Female Employedin:
Energy 6.180a** -1.683 -0.990 -0.036 1.026

Consumption (2.200)b (1.729) (3.709) (1.846) (2.826)
Per Capita 0.456c 0.160 -0.034 -0.004 0.044
(log trans-
formed)
Debitson -0.776 0.046 -0.285 0.418 -0.134
Investment (0.777) (0.611) (1.310) (0.652) (0.998)
Income -0.139 0.011 -0.024 0.107 -0.014
External 0.008 -0.002 0.146 0.000 -0.147

Public (0.139) (0.109) (0.235) (0.117) (0.179)
Debt 0.006 -0.002 0.052 0.000 -0.065
Exportsto 0.130 -0.243 -0.438 -0.056 0.494

Developed (0.208) (0.163) (0.350) (0.174) (0.267)
Market 0.095 -0.228 -0.149 -0.058 0.209
Economies
Latin America -4.596 - 10.628** -39.432** 4.089 35.343**

(4.815) (3.784) (8.117) (4.041) (6.185)
-0.143 -0.427 -0.574 0.182 0.641
Africa -17.476** 11.180* 29.666** -9.736* -19.930**

(5.650) (4.440) (9.525) (4.742) (7.257)
-0.499 0.411 0.395 -0.396 -0.330
Muslim -15.448** -16.324** -12.371 6.811 5.560

(5.805) (4.562) (9.786) (4.872) (7.456)
-0.396 -0.538 -0.148 0.248 0.083
Constantd -5.857 17.705 61.887** 14.827 23.287

(12.102) (9.511) (20.402) (10.157) (15.544)
R2 (adjusted) 0.50 0.49 0.69 0.29 0.72
dIntercept forAsiancountries.
*Significantat 0.05; **significant
at 0.01.
Note: The meansand standarddeviationsofthevariablesappear in AppendixII.

228 and GenderInequality
Dependence,
Development,
are particularlystrikingin the sectoral distributionoffemale labor-forceparticipation.

Female agricultural employmentrates are significantlyhigher in Africa and lower in
Latin America compared to Asia, while female service employmentrates are higherin
Latin America and lower in Africa relative to the Asian region. Concerning female
industrial employment rates, only Africa deviates significantlyfrom the reference
TABLE 6. Effectsof energyconsumptionper capita, dependency,and region on sex ratios

(N = 56).
DependentVariables
Sex Ratio Sex Ratio Sex Ratio of Employment

in:
Energy 2.720a 4.046 7.903 - 34.665** -51.374**

Consumption (3.763)b (3.263) (5.695) (10.362) (15.992)
Per Capita 0.104c 0.213 0.202 -0.659 -0.483
(log trans-
formed)
Debitson -2.964 0.163 - 4.258* 4.003 0.509
Investment (1.329) (1.153) (2.012) (3.661) (5.650)
Income -0.275 0.021 -0.264 0.184 0.012
External -0.009 -0.004 -0.113 -0.343 -0.624
Public (0.238) (0.206) (0.360) (0.655) (1.012)
Debt -0.003 -0.002 -0.030 -0.067 -0.060
Exportsto 0.603 -0.455 0.480 -0.184 3.543*

Developed (0.355) (0.308) (0.538) (0.978) (1.510)
Market 0.228 -0.237 0.121 -0.034 0.329
Economies
Latin America 21.527** - 21.053** -67.594** 23.606 207.879**
(8.236) (7.143) (12.465) (22.679) (35.003)
0.349 -0.468 -0.732 0.190 0.827
Africa - 31.562** 16.635* 23.249 - 72.977** -103.276*

(9.664) (8.381) (14.626) (26.612) (41.073)
-0.467 0.338 0.230 -0.536 -0.376
Muslim - 21.419* -33.110* - 13.448 34.215 52.035

(9.929) (8.611) (15.027) (27.342) (42.199)
-0.285 -0.604 -0.119 0.226 0.170
Constantd 55.322** 31.175 54.859 284.005** 362.984**

(20.699) (17.952) (31.328) (24.825) (87.975)
R2 (adjusted) 0.61 0.44 0.60 0.27 0.57
dIntercept forAsiancountries.
*Significantat 0.05; **significant
at 0.01.

category, controllingfor the other independent variables, and it is in the direction of

lower female industrial activity. Note also that the inclusion of region raises sharply
the proportionof variation in national rates of female participation explained by the
regression equations.
Table 6 regressessex ratios on development, dependency, and dummy variables for
region. As in Table 5, region is the most powerful predictor in each equation. By
consideringregion, the amount of variance explained risessubstantiallyrelative to the
adjusted R2s of Table 4. Comparing the other regionsto Asia, the secondary education
sex ratios favor males in Africa and the Muslim area and favor females in Latin
America. Labor-force participation sex ratios give males an advantage in the Latin
American and Muslim regions,while the reverseis true in Africacompared to the base
categoryof Asia. The percentage of the female labor forcein agriculturecompared to
male employmentin that sector is significantlylower in Latin America relative to the
Asian region, while the sex ratio of the industrialsectoris relativelyfavorable to males
in Africa. In service sector employment,the differencesbetween Latin America and
Africacontinue to be striking,as the sex ratio stronglyfavorsfemalesin Latin America
and males in Africa compared to the Asian region. Interregional differences in female
participation rates and sex ratios are thus generally significantand augment the
proportionof variance explained in most of the regressionequations.
Another interestingfindingof Table 6 is the performanceof the development and
dependency variables. Energy consumption is severely weakened as a predictor of
education and labor-force sex ratios, but emerges as significantin two employment
sectors. Controlling for the effectsof region and dependency, development is now
associated with a male advantage in the industrialand service sectors.Concerning the
dependency variables, debits on investment income retains its former positive
relationshipto gender inequality in secondary education and agriculturalemployment
found in Table 4. Exports to the developed market economies loses its predictive
power in several equations with the inclusion of region, but emerges as a significant
predictor for the sex ratio of service employment. This partial coefficientis positive,
indicating that export dependency is associated with a larger share of females in
service employmentrelative to the distributionof the male labor force.
In sum, region appears to be the strongestpredictor of female rates of educational
and economic participation and female-to-malesex ratios. The inclusion of dummy
variables forregion weakens the relationshipbetween measures of energyconsumption
and export dependency and female participation rates (Table 5). In the equations
explaining national variations in sex ratios, controllingfor region has little effecton
fordebt and investmentdependency, but significantlyalters the
the partial coefficients
magnitude (and in some cases the direction) of several coefficientsfor energy
consumption per capita and export dependency (Table 6).
Discussion
This cross-sectional study of 60 Third World countries explores the power of
macroeconomic conditions of economic development and dependency for predicting
national variations in women's education and labor-forceparticipation levels and sex
ratios. I began by examining bivariate relationshipsbetween energyconsumption per
capita and the 10 dependent variables, added measures of investment,debt, and
export dependency to the regressionequations, and ended with the inclusion of four
geographic/culturalregions (Latin America, Africa, Muslim, and Asian).

Dependence,
The most important findingis the significanceof region as a predictor of national

variations in gender inequality. When dummy variables forregion are included in the
regression equations, many of the prior relationships between the macroeconomic
indicators and the dependent variables erode or alter theirdirection. For example, in
the analyses of female participation rates (Table 5), only energy consumption per
capita retains its significantpositive relationship with female secondary education
rates.
Similarly,when sex ratios are regressedon all independent variables in the analysis
(Table 6), several new relationshipsemerge. Energy consumption per capita is now
significantlyassociated with increases in the male advantage in industrial and service
employment. These findings suggest that economic development fails to have the
positive effectson gender equality in the modern employment sectors predicted by
modernization theory.In contrast,two of the three dependency indicators emerge as
significantpredictors of national variations in sex ratios. Investment dependency is
associated with increases in male secondary education enrollment rates relative to
female rates. Also, as investment dependency increases, the male advantage in
agriculturalemploymentrates also increases,perhaps evidencing the predicted impact
of agribusinessesin the directionof restrictedemploymentopportunitiesforwomen in
the primarysector. Dependence on exports to the developed capitalist nations yields
one significantrelationship, suggesting that export dependency is associated with
increases in female service employment rates relative to male rates. Since
dependency/world-system theory,in contrastto modernization theory,hypothesizesa
distinctionbetween the lucrative and secure industrial sector and the somewhat more
marginal service sector,these findingslend some support to the dependency argument
that Third World export dependency has limited value as a strategyfor enlarging
economic opportunitiesforwomen relative to men. It should be noted, however, that
those sectoral divisionsare quite crude and do not reveal gender differencesin income
or occupational status within (or, as previously discussed, between) sectors. In
addition, the debt dependency indicator, external public debt as a percentage of GDP,
has no significantpredictivepower forany of the regressionequations analyzed in this
study. This is not an unexpected finding,given this variable's poor performanceas a
predictor of national variations in income inequality (Rubinson, 1976). A final
interestingfindingof this exploratorystudy is that the dependency indicators, which
are generally weakly associated with the dependent variables, emerge as better
predictors of sex ratios in education and employment than of female participation
rates.
As mentioned above, the most important findingof this study is the significanceof
region for predicting national variations in female participation rates and sex ratios.
These findings suggest several interpretations. One possibility is multicollinearity
between region and the other independent variables, particularly the economic
development indicator. In other words, if energyconsumption varies between regions
but is fairlyuniformwithin each region, the observed findingsmay reflectregional
variations in development levels. This was tested by performingstepwise multiple
regressionanalyses forthe 10 equations, and the resultswere almost identical to those
presentedin Tables 5 and 6, ruling out the multicollinearityexplanation.
A second possibility is that region is interacting with the other independent
variables, such that the effectsof development and dependency vary in magnitude
and, most importantly,in direction by region. If this is so, the inclusion of region
would cancel out the very real but divergenteffectsof the other independent variables

on gender inequality, reducing the significance of the partial coefficientsof

development and dependency. To examine this possibility, separate regression
analyses were performedfor each region. These findingsare tentative, due to the
problems associated with small sample size, but do indicate that only secondary
education sex ratios are affectedby the interaction effectsof region with the other
independent variables. Energy consumption is associated with significantincreases in
female rates of secondary education enrollmentcompared to males in Latin America,
while it increases the male advantage in the Muslim region. Investmentdependency
has the opposite effectson the education sex ratio variable, increasing male relative to
female secondary education enrollmentrates in Latin America while increasingfemale
over male rates in the Muslim area. Finally, export dependency is associated with
increases in female rates of secondary enrollmentrelative to males in Latin America
and Asia, while the reverse is true for the Muslim region. No significantinteraction
effectswere found forthe Africanregion. Although these findingsare provocative, the
interaction effectsbetween region and the other independent variables are not
significantfor the remaining nine measures of gender inequality, suggestingthat this
interpretationof our findingshas limited utility.
The most plausible explanation at this point is that indigenous factors are more
important than position in the world economic system for explaining national
variations in gender inequality. Controlling for the effectsof economic development
and dependency, the regional differencesfound here in the division of labor by sex
replicate the findingsof numerous case-studies. As Tables 5 and 6 indicate, women in
Latin American nations manifest lower rates and sex ratios of paid labor-force
participation and agricultural employment,and higher rates of service employment
compared to the Asian region. The importance of domestic service as a source of
female employmentin Latin America, by far the most urbanized region of the Third
World, is well- documented (Arizpe, 1977; Jelin, 1977). Other scholars have pointed
out that the development of capitalist agricultural enterpriseshas relegated rural
Latin American women to marginal farmworkerstatus,employed seasonally and paid
by piecework rather than by a daily wage (Leon de Leal and Deere, 1979; Young,
1982). Controlling for the other independent variables, African women have
significantlylower rates and sex ratios of national secondary education enrollment,
industrial, and service employment compared to the Asian region, while labor-force
participation rates are relatively more favorable to African females. These data
support the argument that the concentration of African males in commercial
agriculture, mining, and manufacturing,often as migrant laborers living far from
home, has increasinglyforced women to participate in subsistencefarming(Boserup,
1970; Remy, 1975; Afonja, 1981). Finally, the Muslim region diverges significantly
fromthe Asian base region in education and paid employment. For both categories,
Muslim women have both lower rates of participation and lower national sex ratios
compared to non-Muslim Asian nations, lending furthersupport to the common
argument that seclusion norms severely restrict the range of extrafamilial roles
available to Muslim women (Youssef, 1974).
In general, it appears that gender stratificationis more sensitive to cultural
influencesthan class inequality. Without direct measurementof these cultural factors,
however, we can only speculate as to their exact content and operation. It is
commonly observed that gender inequality, or patriarchy, is deeply embedded in
cultural norms and institutions,fromfamilyand religious structuresto the division of
labor and the consolidation of individual gender identities.Several specifichypotheses

Dependence,
have been proposed. Boserup (1970), for example, argues that cultures are
distinguishedby male and female farmingsystems,determined primarilyby level of
technology.Thus, the traditionoffemale farmingin Africa which distinguishesit from
the other Third World regions explains females' relative advantage in agricultural
employment. Youssef (1974) proposes that family structureis the major institution
responsible for the social control of women. Comparing Latin America and the
Middle East, she contends that divergentcolonial policies competed with the familyin
the formerregion but favored familial autonomy in the Middle East, so that cultural
constraintsagainst female mobilityin the public sphere are more effectively enforced
and are furtherbolstered by the retentionof norms mandating the lifetimefinancial
support of Muslim women by their male relatives. More recently, in the oil-rich
countriesof the Middle East, ec-onomicdevelopment is sometimesso disruptiveof the
indigenous social structurethat the national political leadership has reactivated the
patriarchal familyas a unifyingcultural symbol forreasons of political expediency. In
the process, female access to the opportunities emergent with development are
restricted (Marshall, 1979, 1984a,b). In other regions, economic exigencies for
increased productivity and lower fertilitymay impel political elites to attack
traditional constraintsagainst female employment,although not always to women's
advantage (see Andors, 1976). At the very least, the findingsof this cross-sectional
study challenge the cultural convergence hypothesisof some modernization theorists
(e.g., Lerner, 1958; Inkeles and Smith, 1974; fora critical view, see Moore, 1979) that
economic development universallyWesternizesindigenous cultural institutions.They
also lend support to the growing criticismthat dependency/world-system theory is
seriouslyflawed by its tendency to neglect the analysis of internal dynamics, such as
the manner in which indigenous political and class relations and cultural constraints
mitigate the effectsof national and international economic transactions on gender
equality (see Portes, 1976; Ward, 1983).
I further propose that the interaction between class and gender stratification
systemsis shaped by cultural influences.In some regions,such as Africa,data suggest
that the strategyof class exploitation may entail the integrationof male workersinto
the industrial and service sectors while leaving women to support themselvesin the
agricultural sector. In others,such as the Muslim region, the economic dependence of
women on men facilitatesemployer control over male workers.In Latin America, the
integration of women into service employment permits more extensive wage
exploitation of both sexes. The interconnection between these two systems of
inequality and social control is in need of more direct analysis, including the
investigation of regional variations in patterns of women's status and gender
inequality by class.
Conclusion
This study of 60 less developed countries is a somewhat conservative test of the
relationship betweeen economic development, dependence, and gender inequality.
The inclusion of wealthy, capitalist nations in the regression analyses would have
facilitated the attainment of significantfindings,both by increasing sample size and
by dichotomizing many of the cases into wealthy, autonomous, egalitarian nations
and poor, dependent states with greater gender discrepancies. In some respects,
however, this study has raised more questions than it has answered. We have
discovered the importance of cultural region for explaining national variations in

women's status and gender inequality, but have yet to specify how this dynamic
operates or to identifyits sources by region. In addition, the dependent variables used
in the present analysis require furtherrefinementbefore these tentative findingsthat
macroeconomic variables are relatively unimportant predictorsof gender differences
are accepted conclusively. For example, secondary education enrollment statistics
might address gender differencesin curriculum content. The labor-forceparticipation
of women as unpaid family workersshould also be considered, since informallabor
marketsmay reveal greatergender discrepancies. The exact nature ofmale and female
employment within each sector must be specified,perhaps through the use of more
detailed national census data. Finally, the next step proposed is replication of this
cross-sectional study with a panel analysis that measures the degree of change in
women's status and gender inequality within each country. This research design
should be less sensitiveto the effectsof culture and provide a more thoroughtestof the
influenceof macroeconomic processes on changes in gender stratificationin the Third
World.

Dependence,
Appendix I: Countries Used in the Analysis
Africa Latin America
Chad Barbados
Ethiopia Bolivia
Gabon Brazil
Ghana Chile
IvoryCoast Colombia
Kenya Costa Rica
Malawi DominicanRepublic
Mauritius Ecuador
Nigeria El Salvador
SierraLeone Guatemala
Tanzania Guyana
Uganda Honduras
Upper Volta Jamaica
Zaire Mexico
Zambia Nicaragua
Panama
Algeria Paraguay
Egypt Peru
Morocco Trinidadand Tobago
Sudan Uruguay
Tunisia Venezuela
Asia AMuslim Miscellaneous
Indonesia Cyprus
Iran Lebanona
Iraq Malta
Jordan Yugoslavia
Syria
Turkey
Burma
Fiji Islands
India
Malaysia
Philippines
RepublicofSouthKorea
Singapore
Sri Lanka
Thailand
withtheotherAsiancountriesusedin thesampleand is thus

aLebanonsharesfewculturalcharacteristics
excludedfromtheregionalanalysis.

Appendix II. Means and Standard Deviations of Variables Used in the Analysis
Standard
Variable Mean Deviation
1. Energyconsumption percapita (log transformed) 5.734 1.167

2. Debitson investment income 2.942 2.723
3. Externalpublicdebt 20.923 11.917
4. Exports 15.168 11.204
5. Femalesecondaryeducationrate 21.155 16.579
6. Female labor-forceparticipation rate 19.447 12.011
7. Female agricultureemployment 42.078 32.863
8. Female industrialemployment 15.482 10.659
9. Female serviceemployment 42.440 26.653
10. Secondaryeducationsex ratio 67.465 29.588
11. Labor-forceparticipationsex ratio 37.478 21.557
12. Agriculturalemployment sex ratio 74.323 46.773
13. Industrialemployment sex ratio 83.968 59.355
14. Serviceemployment sex ratio 172.429 119.892

Dependence,
zo coo cO - o - r- Co cO o
o= CO CD d'ZI oo c - _C C4
c Co (00
CN - Lo Lo, co t- CM
I I I I I I
- cL C - -
co o- o co o1 oco o. o oo
_- c o cr- CO CM r-CS- -
t_~~~~~~C_c~cO ~
(._
: C
s (. c
-
)
NC)Ln
c o cN
-= O ls
) CD (0 CC M co (0c
> CDCCM D- LooLr CM
Il
ooooo II
Cl UCD C)o C) o o CD
CD CoI
O ~ CN -bO C) CO CN so
64 00 dq - 00bo c
onCq -. -co o- 0 o)
a; cD) cD cnoiCD
o ccc
*5N0O O
S 00
cn r- 01
(+ co m o
.Y Ln- 00 CD dz)
-
Q s:)C O C
- CD
t:) CM
a; I
5H~~~~~~~~I I
a) CDCl t: n 1-
CD CDCD .O
X\ c r oc
rN W
OI I

Notes
1. Some noteworthy compilationsof such case-studiesinclude Reiter (1975); Iglitzinand Ross (1976);
Schlegel (1977); WellesleyEditorial Committee(1977); Bourguignon(1980); Lindsay (1980). One
recentcross-national studyof the relationshipbetweennationaleconomicdependencyand women's
statushas been done by Ward (1983).
2. This does notcontradictmodernization theory'sfunctionalist
roots.Parsons(1954:94-95),forexample,
characterizedthe modern sexual division of labor as breadwinning(instrumental)male and
homemaking(expressive)female. While Parsons highlightedwomen's autonomyover theirown
domestic sphere, the more recent feministperspectiveregards this increased female economic
dependenceon malesas deleteriousto genderequality.
3. By viewinggreatermale integrationinto the capitalistsectoras beneficialto men, thisperspective
implicitlyemphasizesthe significance of productiveover reproductiveroles forimprovingwomen's
status,and hence makes class dominationsecondaryto that of patriarchy(see Hartmann and
Markusen,1980,and theconcludingdiscussionofthispaper).
4. Centrallyplannedeconomiesare notincladedin theanalysisdue to insufficient economicdata.
5. This indicatordoes notincludeunpaidfamilyworkers, who constitutea largershareoffemalethanof
male laborers,althoughthisvariesby region(see Youssef,1977). This oversight is notproblematicfor
the presentresearchconcern,however,since we are interestedin comparinggenderdifferences in
participation in themonetized,modernsectors.
6. The methodology forestimating labor-force
data is extensively
discussedin International Labour Office
(1977,Vol. 6).
7. Agriculture (Division1 ofISIC) includesagriculture, hunting,forestry,
and fishing. Industry(Divisions
2-5 of ISIC) includesmining,quarrying,manufacturing, gas, water,and construction.
electricity,
Service(Divisions6-9 ofISIC) consistsofwholesaleand retailtrade,restaurants and hotels,transport,
storageand communication, financing,insurance,real estateand businessservices,and community,
social,and personalservices.
8. For example,if40 per centofeligiblefemalesare enrolledin secondaryschoolcomparedto80 percent
ofeligiblemales,thesexratiois 50, and if60 percentofthepaid femalelaborforceis in theagricultural
sectorcomparedto 30 percentofthepaid male laborforce,thecorresponding sex ratiois 200.
9. Preliminary analysescomparingthesetwoindicatorsofeconomicdevelopmentfoundhighcorrelation
betweenthem (Pearson's r = 0.836) and substantiallythe same performance as in the regression
analysesreportedhere.
10. As AppendixIII indicates,investment and exportdependenceare positivelycorrelatedwithenergy
consumptionper capita, while debt dependencehas a weak positivecorrelationwith the energy
variable.
11. The amountofforeignreservesas a percentageof the GDP is an alternativemeasureofforeigndebt
foundby Rubinson (1976) to be a strongerpredictorof variationsin income inequality.Due to
data fortheThird World,however,use of thisindicatorwould have severelyreducedthe
insufficient
numberofcasesavailableforanalysis.
12. Each ofthe 10 dependentvariableswas also regressedon thedependencyindicators,omittingenergy
consumption.The resultswere substantially similarto thosepresentedin Tables 3 and 4, although
investment dependenceemergedas a strongerpredictorof femaleparticipationrates.However,the
proportion ofthevarianceexplained(in no equationexceeding0.08) was extremely low.
13. The Muslimregionalvariablewas createdbecause of its well-documented culturalproscriptions on
femalepublicparticipation (see Youssef,1978).Countriesare includedin theMuslimregionalcategory
iftheirpopulationsare morethan70 per centMuslim.
References
AFONJA,S. (1981) ChangingModes of Productionand the Sexual Divisionof Labor among the Yoruba.
Signs7 (2): 299-313.
AMIN, S. (1974) Accumulationon a WorldScale. New York,NY: MonthlyReviewPress.
New York,NY: MonthlyReviewPress.
AMIN, S. (1976) Unequal Development.
ANDORS, P. (1976) PoliticsofChineseDevelopment:The Case ofWomen,1960-1966.Signs2 (1): 89-119.
ARIZPE,L. (1977) 'Womenin the InformalLabor Sector:The Case of Mexico City'.In WomenandNational
Development:The Complexities
of Change,edited by Wellesley Editorial Committee, 25-37. Chicago, IL:
ofChicago Press.
University
ARRIGHI,G. (1970) 'InternationalCorporations,Labor Aristocracies,and Economic Developmentin

Dependence,
Tropical Africa'. In Imperialismand Underdevelopment:

A Reader,edited by R. I. Rhodes, 220-267. New
York,NY: MonthlyReviewPress.
BANFIELD, E. (1958) TheMoralBasisofa Backward
Society.
New York,NY: The Free Press.
BARAN,P. (1957) ThePolitical
Economy ofGrowth.
New York,NY: MonthlyReviewPress.
BENERIA, L. (1982) "AccountingforWomen'sWork".In Women andDevelopment:
TheSexualDivisionofLabor
inRuralSocietihes,
editedby L. Beneria,119-148.New York,NY: Praeger.
BLAU, F. (1979) 'Womenin theLabor Force:An Overview'.In Women: A FeministPerspective,
2nd ed., edited
byJ. Freeman,265-289.Palo Alto,CA: Mayfield.
BORNSCHIER, V., C. CHASE-DUNN, AND R. RUBINSON (1978) CrossNational Evidenceof the Effects
of Foreign
Investmentand Aid on EconomicGrowthand Inequality:A Surveyof Findingsand a Reanalysis.
AmericanJournalof Sociology84 (3): 651-683.
BORNSCHIER, V. AND T. H. BALLMER-CAO (1979) Income Inequality: A Cross-NationalStudy of the
Relationshipsbetween MNC-Penetration,Dimensions of the Power Structure and Income
Distribution. AmericanJournalof Sociology44 (3): 487-506.
BOSERUP,E. (1970) Woman'sRole in EconomicDevelopment.
London, UK: Allen and Unwin.
2 (4): 587-601.
BOSSEN,L. (1975) Women in Modernizing Societies. AmericanEthnologist
BOURGUIGNON,B., ED. (1980) A Worldof Women:Anthropological
Studiesof Womenin theSocietiesof theWorld.New
York,NY: Praeger.
CHASE-DUNN, C. (1975) The Effects
ofInternational EconomicDependenceon Developmentand Inequality:
A Cross-National Study. AmericanSociologicalReview40 (6): 720-738.
DELACROIX, J. (1977) The Export of Raw Materials and Economic Growth:A Cross-NationalStudy.
AmericanSociologicalReview42 (5): 795-808.
Dos SANTOS, T. (1970) The StructureofDependence.American Economic 60 (2): 231-236.
Review
ELLIOrT,C. M. (1977) 'Theories of Development: An Assessment'. In Womenand National Development:The
of Change,edited by WellesleyEditorial Committee,1-8. Chicago, IL: Universityof
Complexities
Chicago Press.
EMMANUEL, A. (1972) Unequal Exchange:A Studyin theImperialismof Trade. New York, NY: Monthly Review
Press.
EVANS, P. B. AND M. TIMBERLAKE (1980) Dependence, Inequality,and the Growthof the Tertiary:A
ComparativeAnalysisofLess Developed Countries.American Review
Sociological 45 (4): 531-552.
FIALA, R. (1983) Inequalityand theServiceSectorin Less Developed Countries. American Review
Sociological
48 (3): 421-428.
FRANK, A. G. (1979) Dependent Accumulation andUnderdevelopment. New York,NY: MonthlyReviewPress.
GALTUNG,J. (1971) 'A Structural TheoryofImperialism. Journal ofPeaceResearch8 (1): 81-117.
GIELE, J. Z. (1972) CenturiesofWomanhood:An Evolutionary Perspectiveon theFeminineRole. Women's
Studies1 (1): 97-110.
GOODE, W. J. (1963) World Revolution andFamilyPatterns. New York,NY: The Free Press.
HAGEN, E. B. (1963) How EconomicGrowthBegins:A Theoryof Social Change.Journal ofSocialIssues19
(1): 20-34.
HAREVEN, T. K. (1978) 'Family Time and HistoricalTime'. In The Family,edited by A. S. Rossi,
J. Kagan and T. K. Hareven,57-70. New York,NY: W. W. Norton.
HARTMANN, H. (1976) Capitalism,Patriarchy, andJob Segregationby Sex. Signs1 (3): 137-169.
HARTMANN, H. AND A. R. MARKUSEN (1980) ContemporaryMarxist Theory and Practice: A Feminist
Critique. Reviewof Radical PoliticalEconomics12 (2): 87-93.
HUNTER, G. (1969) Modernizing New York,NY: OxfordUniversity
PeasantSocieties. Press.
IGLITZIN, L. B. (1976) 'The PatriarchalHeritage'.In Women intheWorld:A Comparative Study,editedby L. B.
Iglitzinand R. Ross,7-24. Santa Barbara,CA: Clio.
IGLITZIN, L. B. AND R. Ross, eds. (1976) Women intheWorld:A Comparative Study.Santa Barbara,CA: Clio.
INKELES, A. AND D. H. SMITH (1974) Becoming Modern.Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversity Press.
INTERNATIONAL BANKFOR RECONSTRUCTIONAND DEVELOPMENT (IBRD) (1976) World Tables 1976. Baltimore, MD:
JohnsHopkinsUniversity Press.
INTERNATIONALLABOUR OFFICE (ILO) (1977) Labour Force Estimates and Projections,1950-2000. Geneva,
Switzerland: International Labour Office.
INTERNATIONALMONETARY FUND (IMF) (1973) Balanceof Payments Vol. 24. Washington,DC:
Yearbook.
International Monetary Fund.
JELIN, E. (1977) 'Migration and Labor Force Participationof Latin AmericanWomen: The Domestic
Servants in the Cities'. In Womenand National Development:The Complexitiesof Change, edited by
Wellesley Editorial Committee, 129-141. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
KENTOR, J. (1981) Structural Determinants of Peripheral Urbanization: The Effects of International
Dependence. AmericanSociologicalReview46 (2): 201-21 1.

KLEIN,V. (1963/64)Industrialization and theChangingRole ofWomen.Current 12 (1): 24-34.

Sociology
LENIN,V. I. (1939) Imperialism,
theHighestStage of Capitalism.New York, NY: International Publishers.
LEONDE LEAL,M. ANDC. D. DEERE (1979) Rural Women and the Development of Capitalism in Colombian
Signs5 (1): 60-77.
Agriculture.
LERNER,D. (1958) The Passing of TraditionalSociety.New York, NY: The Free Press.
LEVY,M. J. JR. (1949) The FamilyRevolution in ModernChina. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
LINDSAY, B., ed. (1980) Comparative
Perspectives
of Third Wl4orld
Women: The Impactof Race, Sex, and Class. New
York,NY: Praeger.
D. C. (1961) The Achieving
MCCLELLAND, Society.Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
MARSHALL,
S. E. (1979) Islamic Revival in the Maghreb:The UtilityofTraditionforModernizingElites.
Studiesin Comparative
International 14 (1): 95-108.
Development
MARSHALL,S. E. (1984a) Politicsand Female Statusin NorthAfrica:A Reconsideration of Development
Theory. EconomicDevelopment and CulturalChange32 (3): 499-524.
MARSHALL,S. E. (1984b) Paradoxesof Change: CultureCrisis,Islamic Revival, and the Reactivationof
Patriarchy. Journalof Asian and AfricanStudies19 (1-2): 1-17.
MOORE,W. E. (1979) WorldModernization:The Limitsof Convergence.
New York, NY: Elsevier.
MYRDAL,A. and V. KLEIN(1956) Women'sTwo Roles, Home and Work.London, UK: Routledge and Kegan
Paul.
OAKLEY,A. (1974) Woman's Work.New York, NY: Vintage Books.
O'CONNELL,J. (1976) 'The Conceptof Modernization'.In Comparative editedby C. E. Black,
Modernization,
13-24.New York,NY: The Free Press.
V. K. (1970) The FemaleLabor Forcein theUnitedStates.Berkeley, CA: University of California,
OPPENHEIMER,
InstituteofInternational
Studies.
PARSONS,T. (1954) Essays in SociologicalTheory.New York, NY: The Free Press.
PARSONS,T. (1960) Structureand Processin ModernSocieties.Chicago, IL: The Free Press.
PARSONS,T. (1971) The Systemof ModernSocieties.Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice-Hall.
PATAI,R. (1967) Womenin theModern World.New York, NY: The Free Press.
A. (1976) On the Sociologyof National Development:Theoriesand Issues. American
PORTES, Journalof
Sociology82 (1): 55-85.
REITER,R. R. ed. (1975) Toward an Anthropology
of Women.New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.
REMy,D. (1975) 'Underdevelopment and theExperienceofWomen:A NigerianCase Study'.In Towardan
Anthropology
of Women, editedby R. R. Reiter,358-371.New York,NY: MonthlyReviewPress.
R. (1976) The WorldEconomyand theDistribution
RUBINSON, of IncomewithinStates:A Cross-National
Study. AmericanSociologicalReview41 (4): 638-659.
RYAN,M. P. (1975) Womanhood
in America:FromColonial TimestothePresent.New York, NY: New Viewpoints.
H. (1975) 'Female Labor and Capitalismin the United States and Brazil'. In Women
SAFFIOTTI, Cross-
ChangeandChallenge,
Culturally: 59-94. The Hague, The Netherlands:
editedby R. Rohrlich-Leavitt,
Mouton.
SCHLEGEL,A., ed. (1977) Sexual Stratification:
A Cross-CulturalView. New York, NY: Columbia University
Press.
SEN,G. (1982) 'Women Workers and the Green Revolution.' In Womenand Development:The Sexual Divisionof
LaborinRuralSocieties,
editedby L. Beneria,29-64. New York,NY: Praeger.
SHORTER,E. (1975) The Making of theModernFamily.New York, NY: Basic Books.
N. J. (1966) 'The Modernizationof Social Relations'. In Modernization,
SMELSER, edited by M. Weiner,
110-121.New York,NY: Basic Books.
N. J. and S. M. LIPSET
SMELSER, (1966) 'Social Structure,
Mobilityand Development'.In SocialStructure
and
Mobilityin Economic Development,edited by N. J. Smelserand S. M. Lipset, 1-50. London, UK:
Routledgeand Kegan Paul.
STOKES, R. G. and D. JAFFEE(1982) The Export of Raw Materials and Economic Growth. American
SociologicalReview47 (3): 402-407.
SWEEZY,P. (1942) The Theoryof CapitalistDevelopment.
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
S. (1981) The SeparationofWomen'sRemuneratedand HouseholdWork:TheoreticalPerspectives
TIANO,
on 'Womenin Development'.Paper presentedat the annual meetingsof the AmericanSociological
Association,Toronto,Canada.
TILLY, L. A. andJ. W. SCOTT(1978) Women,Work,and Family.New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
UNESCO(1980) Statisticalrearbook.Paris, France: UNESCO.
UNITEDNATIONS(1974) rearbookof International Trade Statistics,1972-1973. New York, NY: United Nations
StatisticalOffice.
UNITEDNATIONS(1975) Statisticalrearbook,1974. New York, NY: UN Department of Economic and Social
Affairs.

Dependence,
VANALLEN, J. (1976) 'AfricanWomen,"Modernization",and NationalLiberation'.In Women

intheWorld:
A Comparative Study,editedby L. B. Iglitzinand R. Ross,25-54. Santa Barbara,CA: Clio.
WALLERSTEIN, I. (1974) TheModernWorld-System I: Capitalist
Agriculture
andtheOriginsoftheEuropean World-
Economy intheSixteenth
Century.New York,NY: AcademicPress.
WALLERSTEIN, I. (1979) TheCapitalistWorld-Economy. New York,NY: CambridgeUniversity Press.
WALLERSTEIN, I. (1980) The ModernWorld-System II: Mercantilism
andtheConsolidation
oftheEuropeanWorld-
Economy, 1600-1750. New York,NY: AcademicPress.
WARD, K. B. (1983) 'The Economic Status of Women in the World-System: A Hidden Crisis in
Development'.In Crisesin theWorld-System, editedby A. Bergesen,117-139.BeverlyHills, CA: Sage
Publications.
WELLESLEY EDITORIAL CoMMirrEE,eds. (1977) Women and NationalDevelopment:The Complexities
of Change.
Chicago,IL: University ofChicago Press.
WELLS, R. (1976) 'DemographicChange and theLifeCycleofAmericanFamilies'.In TheFamily inHistory,
editedbyT. K. Rabb and R. I. Rotberg,85-94. New York,NY: Octagon.
WILENSKY, H. L. (1968) Women'sWork: EconomicGrowth,Ideology,and Structure.Industrial Relations
7 (3): 235-248.
YOUNG, K. (1982) 'The Creationofa RelativeSurplusPopulation:A Case StudyfromMexico'. In Women
andDevelopment: TheSexualDivisionofLaborinRuralSocieties, editedby L. Beneria,149-178.New York,
NY: Praeger.
YOUSSEF, N. H. (1974) Womenand Workin DevelopingSocieties:PopulationMonographSeriesNo. 15.
Berkeley, CA: University ofCaliforniaInstituteofInternational Studies.
YOUSSEF, N. H. (1977) Women and Agricultural Productionin Muslim Societies.Studiesin Comparative
International
Development12 (1): 41-58.
YOUSSEF, N. H. (1978) 'The Statusand Fertility LevelsofWomen'.In Women intheMuslimWorld, editedby
N. Keddie and L. Beck,69-99. Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversity Press.


Gender Inequality, Development and Dependence in Third World Nations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gender Inequality, Development and Dependence in Third World Nations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Development, Dependence, and Gender Inequality in the Third World

Author(s): Susan E. Marshall

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

Development, Dependence, and Gender

While therehas been much recentempiricalinvestigation of the relationship

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

Contrasting Perspectives on Gender Inequality and Development

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

World trade is oriented toward exports to the wealthy capitalist countries,argued to

Female Female % oftheFemaleLaborForceEmployed

Energy 9.318a** -3.417** -16.422** 3.291 ** 13.131**

Concerning the structure of the female labor force, examination of Table 1

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

inferior economic status, although the absence of occupational or income data

TABLE 2. of energyconsumptionper capita on educationand employment

SexRatio SexRatio SexRatioofEmployment

Energy 12.155a** - 5.045* -9.218 -9.703 21.441

Table 2 investigatesmore directlythe relationship between economic development

The EffectsofDependent on GenderInequality

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

TABLE 3. Effectsof energyconsumptionper capita and dependencyon femaleparticipation

Energy 10.808a** - 3.744** - 16.955** 3.793** 13.162**

External -0.142 -0.195 -0.053 0.096 -0.043

Exportsto 0.098 0.346* 0.609 - 0.388** -0.221

There are, however, some significantcoefficientsamong the dependency variables

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

TABLE 4. Effects per capita and dependencyon sex ratios(N = 60).

Sex Ratio Sex Ratio Sex Ratio ofEmployment

Energy 15.437a** -5.678* -7.806 -8.567 20.175

External -0.177 -0.373 -0.563 0.236 0.306

Exports to 0.289 0.621* 1.502* -2.291* -0.634

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

The EffectsofRegionon GenderInequality

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

TABLE 5. Effectsof energy consumptionper capita, dependency,and region on female

Energy 6.180a** -1.683 -0.990 -0.036 1.026

External 0.008 -0.002 0.146 0.000 -0.147

Exportsto 0.130 -0.243 -0.438 -0.056 0.494

Latin America -4.596 - 10.628** -39.432** 4.089 35.343**

Africa -17.476** 11.180* 29.666** -9.736* -19.930**

Muslim -15.448** -16.324** -12.371 6.811 5.560

Constantd -5.857 17.705 61.887** 14.827 23.287

R2 (adjusted) 0.50 0.49 0.69 0.29 0.72

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

are particularlystrikingin the sectoral distributionoffemale labor-forceparticipation.

TABLE 6. Effectsof energyconsumptionper capita, dependency,and region on sex ratios

Sex Ratio Sex Ratio Sex Ratio of Employment

Energy 2.720a 4.046 7.903 - 34.665** -51.374**

Exportsto 0.603 -0.455 0.480 -0.184 3.543*

Africa - 31.562** 16.635* 23.249 - 72.977** -103.276*

Muslim - 21.419* -33.110* - 13.448 34.215 52.035

Constantd 55.322** 31.175 54.859 284.005** 362.984**

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

category, controllingfor the other independent variables, and it is in the direction of

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

The most important findingis the significanceof region as a predictor of national

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

on gender inequality, reducing the significance of the partial coefficientsof

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.24 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:51:28 PM

Energy 9.318a -3.417 -16.422 3.291 13.131**

Energy 10.808a - 3.744 - 16.955 3.793 13.162**

Latin America -4.596 - 10.628 -39.432 4.089 35.343**

Muslim -15.448 -16.324 -12.371 6.811 5.560

Energy 2.720a 4.046 7.903 - 34.665 -51.374

Constantd 55.322 31.175 54.859 284.005 362.984**