IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jhudca/v7y2006i2p161-181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Uses and Misuses of the Gender-related Development Index and Gender Empowerment Measure: A Review of the Literature

Author

Listed:
  • Dana Schuler

Abstract

The 1995 Human Development Report introduced two new measures of well-being: the Gender-Related Development Index (GDI) and the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM). The two indexes were created with the intention of attracting more attention to gender inequality issues. This paper first of all reviews the attention the indexes received in the publications of the United Nations Development Programme itself, concentrating on their use in national and subnational Human Development Reports. It also reviews how the two indexes were used in academia and the press. The main result of the review is that the GDI in particular seems to be a measure that is not used appropriately. In most cases of misuse, the GDI was wrongly interpreted as a measure of gender inequality. Due to the many misinterpretations, the potential policy impact the GDI and GEM can have seems limited.

Suggested Citation

  • Dana Schuler, 2006. "The Uses and Misuses of the Gender-related Development Index and Gender Empowerment Measure: A Review of the Literature," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 161-181.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jhudca:v:7:y:2006:i:2:p:161-181
    DOI: 10.1080/14649880600768496
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14649880600768496
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14649880600768496?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Iñaki Permanyer, 2010. "The Measurement of Multidimensional Gender Inequality: Continuing the Debate," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 95(2), pages 181-198, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jhudca:v:7:y:2006:i:2:p:161-181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJHD20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.