CENTRE FOR ECONOMIC POLICY AND PUBLIC FINANCE

ASIAN DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE(ADRI)

FEMALE LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION IN INDIA

HAVE WOMEN BEEN LEFT OUT OF GROWTH PROCESS?

 FEMALE LABOR FORCE
PARTICIPATION IN INDIA
• India in the recent decades have enjoyed a
tremendous economic growth.
• Fertility has fallen substantially .
• Female education has risen dramatically.
• Yet a decline in Female labor force
participation.
 OBJECTIVE
• The paper aims to understand the declining
female labor force participation by
considering various determinants like
education, marital status, socio economic
status and household income .
• The paper also try to find if the popular U-
shaped relationship of educational
attainment and development level with
female labor participation exist or not.
 DATA SOURCE AND
METHODOLOGY
• For the purpose of this paper the data has been taken from
NSS Employment and Unemployment Survey:
68th(2011– 2012), 66th(2009-10), 61st(2004-05),
55th(1999-2000) and 50th(1993-94) round.
• Understand decline in female participation by considering
various factors like education, marital status, socio
economic status and household income. Also shows
relationship between educational attainment and
development with females participation and access the
situation with respect to the former in different states.
 LITERATURE REVIEW
• During the initial stages of development when society is
primarily agrarian the female labor force participation
increases, as the society moves on with the developmental
stages , industrialization, technological change and
mechanization in the production process created skill biased
demand for labor however, gender biased progression in
education and skill enhancement ensured that males absorbed
such opportunities while women, in the process, either
withdrew from the labor force or entered as secondary
worker, the shift of work from the home and homestead to the
factory and shops outside the homes pushed women out of
the labor force.

Hartmann (1976)
• In initial stages of economic development, education
levels typically increase much more for men than for
women. Women’s wages and opportunities for work
change relatively slowly while their husband’s income
rises fast, so the negative income effect is likely to
dominate any positive substitution effect of rising female
wages. This is what drives reductions in FLFP according
to the so-called Feminization-U hypothesis

Goldin (1994); Mammen and Paxson ( 2000)

• The feminization of clerical jobs proceeds very slowly
when the number of educated men is in excess of demand
for clerical workers. In initial stages of educational
expansion, those with some education feel entitled to a
white-collar job, and this attitude can persist long after a
majority of the population has reached higher education
levels. Until industrial jobs become more acceptable for
educated persons, there is likely to be considerable
resistance against women’s employment in white-collar
jobs, as this would reduce the opportunities for men.

Boserup (1970)
• Olsen and Mehta ( 2006) analyzed the NSSO data of
1999-2000 found a U curve between employment and
female educational status . They suggested that women
of poor families work both at home and out of home. But
when their income levels improve they leave their outside
work and concentrate on their household activities. On
the other hand the women of higher income groups with
higher educational levels employ domestic help and
concentrate more on their economic activities out of their
homes.
• Das and Desai ( 2003) analyzed NSSO data for 1993-94,
they found that educated women in India are less likely
to be employed, but it is attributed to a lack of
employment opportunities rather than social norms
restricting their movement.
ANALYSIS
 TRENDS IN LABOR FORCE
PARTICIPATION
60
Labour force participation (in%)

50
Rural Female
40
Rural Male
30
Urban Female
20
Urban Male
10

0
YEARS 2011-12 2009-10 2004-05 1999-2000 1993-94 1987-88 1983 1977-78
Total Labour 38.1 38.15 40.925 38.275 40 39.4 39.9 40.3
Force
Total Female 20.4 20.55 25.55 22.45 24.8 24.65 25.05 25.8
Labour Force

Total Male 55.8 55.75 56.3 54.1 55.2 54.15 54.75 54.8
Labour Force
Total Rural 40.3 41.05 44.4 42.1 44.6 44 44.85 44.85
Labor Force

Rural Female 25.3 26.5 33.3 30.2 33.1 33.1 34.2 33.8
Labour Force

Rural Male 55.3 55.6 55.5 54 56.1 54.9 55.5 55.9

Labour Force

Total Urban 35.9 35.25 37.45 34.45 35.4 34.8 34.95 35.75
Labour Force

Urban 15.5 14.6 17.8 14.7 16.5 16.2 15.9 17.8

Female
Labour Force
Urban Male 56.3 55.9 57.1 54.2 54.3 53.4 54 53.7
Labour Force

SOURCE: NSS DATA

• Indian female labor force participation is
declining since 1977-78.
• There was an unusual increase in the female
participation in 1999-2000 to 2004-05.
• But then the trend was again reversed in 2004-
05 to 2011-12.
• Rural female labor participation is most volatile
component of female labor participation.
DETERMINANTS
AGE SPECIFIC LABOUR
FORCE PARTICIPATION
 Rural Male
120

Labour Force Participation (in

100
80 1993-94
60
1999-2000
40
20 2004-05
%)

0 2009-10
2011-12

Rural Female
Labour Force Participation (in

70
60
50
40
1993-94
30 1999-2000
%)

20
10 2004-05
0 2009-10
2011-12
 Urban Male
Labour Force Participation (in 120
100
80
1993-94
60
40 1999-2000
20
%)

2004-05
0
2009-10
2011-12

Urban Female
Labour Force Participation (in %)

40
35 1993-94
30
25 1999-2000
20 2004-05
15
10 2009-10
5 2011-12
0
• A continuous decline in the labor force participation
rate of all rural males, rural females, urban males and
urban females in the age group of 5-24 (except for
the year 2004-05)
• Possible explanation for this can be increase in
participation in education.
• This is what is visible for the case of females. The
enrolment ratio of both the urban as well as rural
females has been increasing since the year 1993-94.
Formal Education of Female Labour Force
of Age 15–24 Years by Residence
NSSO rounds Rural female Urban female
enrolment ratio enrolment ratio
1993-94 8.4 27.8

1999-2000 11.3 29.9

2004-05 14.8 33.2

2009-10 15.2 34.5

2011-12 19.7 35.7

EDUCATION
LEVEL
AND
EMPLOYMENT
 Rural Female
60
% Female Workforce Participation

50
1993-94
40
1999-
30 2000
2004-04
20
2009-10
10
2011-12
0
not literate & Middle Secondary higher graduate
literate up to secondary and above
primary
 Urban Female
35
% Female Workforce Participation

30
1993-94
25
1999-2000
20
2004-05
15

10 2009-10

5 2011-12

0
not literate & Middle Secondary higher graduate
literate up to secondary and above
primary
Distribution by general educational level
for rural females(in %)
Year Not Literate and Middle Secondary and
literate up to above
primary
2011-12 47.5 21.3 13.8 17.4
2009-10 49.8 21.9 13.5 14.8
2004-05 58.5 19.9 11.3 10.2
1999- 65.2 17.4 9.6 7.7
2000
1993-94 70.8 16.6 7.3 5.3
SOURCE: NSS DATA
 Distribution by general educational level
for urban females (in %)
Years Not literate Literate and Middle Secondary
up to and above
primary
2011-12 22.6 17 15.1 45.3
2009-10 23.6 17.2 15.3 43.9
2004-05 27.9 19.7 16.8 35.6
1999-2000 31.8 19.5 15.7 32.8
1993-94 36.3 21.6 14.3 27.7
SOURCE: NSS DATA
 MARITAL STATUS
AND
FEMALE LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION
 RURAL FEMALE
60

50.8
49.2

46.7
50
% Female Labour Participation

38.5

38.4
Currently not
37.3
40

37
married

33.7

28.6

26.7
30 Currently married

20

10

0
1993-94 1999-00 2004-05 2009-10 2011-12
Source:
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/559511491319990632/pd
f/WPS8024.pdf (Authors estimates from NSSO data)
 URBAN FEMALE

28.2
30

25.2

24.9
% Female Labour Participation

22.8

24
22.4

22.4
25

20.3

18.9

20
Currently not
20 married

15
Currently
10 married

0
1993-94 1999-00 2004-05 2009-10 2011-12

Source: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/559511491319990632/pdf/WPS8024.pdf
(Authors estimates from NSSO data)
 PROPOTION
OF MARRIED
AND
NOT MARRIED
WOMEN
 120
RURAL FEMALE URBAN FEMALE
120
100

% of female by Marital Status

% of female by Marital Status

100
80

57.7

58.4

59.8
60.2
80
64.3

62.7
62.8

62.6
60
60

40
40

42.2

41.6

40.2
39.9
37.8

37.4
37.3
37.2

20 20

0 0
1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 2011-12 1993-94 2004-05 2009-10 2011-12

married not married married not married

 SOCIAL STATUS
AND
LABOR PARTICIPATION
 RURAL FEMALE
70 66
62.7 62.5
% Female labour force participation

60
54.6
51.5
48.8 49 47.4
50 46.4
44.1
41.3
40 38.1 38 37.3 ST
32.2 30.7 SC
30 28.1 28.9
OBC
UC
20

10

0
1993-94 1999-2000 2004-05 2007-08 2009-10 2011-12
Source:
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/559511491319990632/pdf/WPS8024.pdf
(Authors estimates from NSSO data)
 URBAN FEMALE
40 37.5
36.6
% Female Labour Force Participation

34.5
35 33.1
31.7 30.7 31.7 31.1
30 27.2
25.8 24.7
25 23.5
21.7 ST
20.1
20 17.8 SC
16 15.7 15.4 OBC
15
UC
10

0
1993-94 1999-2000 2004-05 2007-08 2009-10 2011-12

Source: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/559511491319990632/pdf/WPS8024.pdf
(Authors estimates from NSSO data)
Demographics
Of
Caste
 120
RURAL FEMALE URBAN FEMALE
120

100 100

80 80

% of female
% of female

68.1 68.4 67.1 68.5

60
60 81.6 81.8 82.5 82.2

40
40

20 21.2 21.3 22 20.6

20
10.7 10.2 10.9 10.8
14.5 14.9 14.5 14.5 0

0 4 3.2 2.9 3.3 1999-2000 2004-05 2009-10 2011-12

1999-2000 2004-05 2009-10 2011-12

others (including OBC) SC ST

others(including OBC) SC ST
HOUSEHOLD INCOME
AND
FEMALE LABOR FORCE
PARTICIPATION
 RURAL
50
% of Female Labour Force Participation

45
40
35
1983
30 1987-88
25 1993-94
20 1999-2000
15 2004-05
10 2009-10
5
0
0-10 10 to 20-30 30-40 40 - 50 50 -60 60 - 70 70-80 80-90 90-100
20

Source: https://www.epw.in/author/vinoj-abraham (authors

estimates from NSS unit level data)
DECILE 1983 1987-88 1993-94 1999- 2004-05 2009-10
2000
0-10 45.06 45.91 42.77 25.21 36.98 30.63
10 to 20 45.1 43.82 41.27 24.7 29.5 21.93
20-30 43.4 43.96 38.93 24.55 26.24 21.47
30-40 42.67 42.73 39 23.99 23.99 20.25
40 - 50 41.04 41.34 38.57 23.79 22.65 19.04
50 -60 40.21 42.62 36.46 23.26 21.38 16.82
60 - 70 39.75 40.76 34.93 22.83 19.06 16.59
70-80 38.01 39.36 34.03 22.01 18.86 17.52
80-90 37.31 39.28 33.61 20.66 19.04 14.88
90-100 36.38 39.75 31.65 18.4 15.74 16.82

RURAL FEMALE
Source: https://www.epw.in/author/vinoj-abraham (authors estimates from NSS unit
level data)
 URBAN
40
% of Female Labour Force Participaiton

35
30
1983
25
1987-88
20 1993-94
15 1999-2000
2004-05
10
2009-10
5
0
0-10 10 to 20-30 30-40 40 - 50 50 -60 60 - 70 70-80 80-90 90-100
20

Source: https://www.epw.in/author/vinoj-abraham (authors estimates from NSS unit

level data)
 DECILE 1983 1987-88 1993-94 1999- 2004-05 2009-10
2000
0-10 31.03 30.11 29.23 15.04 28.25 23.23
10 to 20 27.25 27.63 26.29 12.95 19.58 16.75
20-30 26.11 25.97 24.76 13.97 16.46 13.71
30-40 24.23 24.69 21.96 11.96 15.04 12.08
40 - 50 21.77 23.68 22.55 11.6 13.46 11.43
50 -60 22.11 20.5 19.94 10.59 11.7 10.49
60 - 70 21.97 22 20.63 10.66 11.35 10.18
70-80 21.09 20.98 19.57 10.77 12.25 9.42
80-90 23.96 26.02 23.27 12.09 11.16 10.75
90-100 32.7 33.66 29.73 15.81 13.32 12.92

URBAN FEMALE
Source: https://www.epw.in/author/vinoj-abraham (authors estimates from NSS unit
level data)
 WAGE RATE
• The wages have been years R_M R_F UR_M UR_F
deflated using CPI (AL) with
base year 1986-87 for rural
area and CPI (UNME) with the 2011-12 97.79 61.16 135.71 105.74
base year 1984-85 for the
urban area. 2009-10 88.76 55.53 129.72 106.2
• General positive trend is
observed except in the year
2004-05 . 2004-05 79.96 47.19 104.04 78.40
• This is paradoxical situation as
the period of 2004-05 saw an 1999- 82.69 74.04 105.23 86.97
influx of labor particularly 2000
female labor.
• By this it can be hypothesized
that women entered the labor
force in 2004-05 because of 1993-94 58.48 34.89 78.12 62.31
distress and once the situation
was normal they withdrew
from it.
EMPLOYMENT SITUATION
IN STATES
 Difference in gender
gap between 2004-05
and 2011-12

STATES 2011-12 2009-10 2004-05 1993-94

Andhra Pradesh 28 26.4 23.8 23.35 4.2
Assam 45.55 42.4 40.95 40.2 4.6
Bihar 40.8 41.5 38.25 37.15 2.55
Gujarat 39.75 34.6 30.35 29.35 9.4
Haryana 40.05 35.75 30.05 28.65 10
Himanchal Pradesh 19.7 24.55 20.55 18.9 -0.85
Karnataka 37.7 33.4 28.05 27.2 9.65
Kerala 33.5 32.7 27.5 32.65 6
Madhya Pradesh 36.95 32.85 28.4 25.75 8.55
Maharashtra 29.05 30.45 24.1 22.6 4.95
Odisha 40 40.65 30.2 32.15 9.8
Punjab 39.35 38.15 33.15 45.1 6.2
Tamil Nadu 30.45 29.2 24.75 24.3 5.7
Uttar Pradesh 37.25 38.4 34 35.15 3.25
West Bengal 42.6 45.85 43.2 39.9 -0.6

GENDER GAP IN LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION

SOURCE: NSSO DATA
STATE WISE LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION
SOURCE: NSSO Data
STATE WISE LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION
SOURCE: NSSO Data
 EDUCATION
AND
LABOR FORCE
 RURAL FEMALES 2011-12
states not literate literate up to primary middle secondary graduate
Gujarat 44.5 40.2 31.1 20.5 45.15
Haryana 25.8 24 14.3 17.2 19.4
Karnataka 46.9 38.8 32.1 22.8 61.7
Kerala 24.5 31.9 29.3 26 38.15
Madhya Pradesh 46.2 31 20.6 9.2 27.05
Odisha 45.7 34 23.5 10.8 26.9
Punjab 33.8 38.8 25.9 25.8 35.85
Tamil Nadu 59.7 58.8 45.8 25.2 42.8
2009-10
states not literate literate up to primary middle secondary graduate
Gujarat 50.8 47.4 35.1 16.6 25.25
Haryana 38.3 36.7 28.6 29 23.35
Karnataka 57.4 51.5 45 25.4 56.2
Kerala 29.3 30.3 26.2 24.3 44.35
Madhya Pradesh 51.6 37.7 26.1 27.6 13.6
Odisha 43.4 32.2 21.5 13.2 47.05
Punjab 36.1 31.6 28.4 28.6 38.55
Tamil Nadu 63.1 60.3 47.4 25.6 38.2
2004-05
states not literate literate up to primary middle secondary graduate
Gujarat 68.5 60 52.1 48.7 27.8
Haryana 53.9 44.9 39.2 44.2 16.3
Karnataka 69.3 65.1 49.9 33.3 38.6
Kerala 33.3 38.1 32.6 26.2 45.9
Madhya Pradesh 65.2 45.6 28.6 22.4 24.6
Odisha 57.9 34.7 28.8 16.6 18.2
Punjab 48.7 51.1 39.3 37.8 39.4
Tamil Nadu 68.8 67.4 49.8 38.3 49.5
 URBAN FEMALES 2011-12
YEAR not literate literate up to primary middle secondary graduate
Gujarat 23.1 12.5 15.9 13.2 25.7
Haryana 8.9 9 12.3 5.2 31.1
Karnataka 24.3 23 15 14.4 47.1
Kerala 18.7 19.8 20.4 20.3 42.7
Madhya Pradesh 23.6 16.4 11.2 5 23
Odisha 35.2 19.9 7.1 4.1 26.75
Punjab 13.3 14.1 15.3 11.8 34.15
Tamil Nadu 31.2 36.1 23.7 16.2 39.15

2009-10
YEAR not literate literate up to primary middle secondary graduate
Gujarat 22.2 19.4 18 9.2 30.35
Haryana 22.5 25.2 12.2 8.1 25.1
Karnataka 31.7 22.4 19.7 8.2 41.1
Kerala 20.1 21.9 24.8 17.6 52.75
Madhya Pradesh 24.8 20.7 14 6.6 24.3
Odisha 26.4 19.6 10.5 4.3 13.95
Punjab 18.9 16.7 11.7 9.8 29.85
Tamil Nadu 34.4 29.6 21.1 12.8 34.6

2004-05
YEAR not literate literate up to primary middle secondary graduate
Gujarat 29.3 20.7 16.2 14.5 18.9
Haryana 21.5 16.5 12.4 15.9 26.8
Karnataka 33.4 25 23.2 11.7 25.7
Kerala 30.4 28.7 20.1 17.4 42.9
Madhya Pradesh 30.2 22.5 14.3 10.6 28.7
Odisha 34.5 13.6 8.8 14.2 27
Punjab 17.4 17.5 8.1 8.9 36.4
Tamil Nadu 40.7 37.6 25 18.1 35.2
 PROPOTIONS OF FEMALES IN DIFFERENT LEVEL OF
EDUCATION
RURAL 2011-12 2004-05
states not literate secondary and not literate secondary and
above above
Gujarat 43.5 10.3 53.1 7.6
Haryana 41 18.8 52.7 10.2
Karnataka 42.8 16.4 53.3 8.3
Kerala 15.4 30.7 19.4 23.4
Madhya 46.9 7.6 64 3.1
Pradesh

Odisha 42.9 9.6 54 6

Punjab 35 22.5 41.2 16
Tamil Nadu 35.8 18.9 45.5 9.5
URBAN 2011-12 2004-05
STATES not literate secondary and not literate secondary and
above above
Gujarat 22.1 31.1 26.4 26.8
Haryana 24.7 39.7 33.1 31.2
Karnataka 23.4 39.9 30.6 28.3
Kerala 12.8 40.1 16.1 31.6
Madhya 26.2 29.7 34.9 23.1
Pradesh

Odisha 29.8 24.8 33.6 22.7

Punjab 24.9 39.6 26.9 38.1
Tamil Nadu 23.1 36 24.4 26.9
 SUM-UP
• Increase in educational attainment is one
explanatory factor for decline in female
participation.
• Educational attainment not translating into
higher participation rate.
• Education it seems is only helping in
internalizing and modernizing the patriarchal
norms.
• Discrimination exist is in the labor market and
there are various social restrictions that an
India women face.
• Negative relationship between income level
of household and female participation in labor
market both in cross-sectional and inter-
temporal view.
THANK YOU