Participation of Women in the Labor Markets of the Asia-Pacific/Oceania Regions:
What Advances Have Been Made? What Obstacles Remain? How Can We Assess Them?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participation of Women in the Labor Markets of the
Asia-Pacific/Oceania Regions:
What Advances Have Been Made?
What Obstacles Remain? How Can We Assess Them?
Pauline C. Reich
Professor
Waseda University School of Law
Tokyo, Japan
“What gets counted gets done”- New Zealand Census of Women’s Participation in Governance and Professional Life - New Zealand Human Rights Commission 2004
Introduction
The objective of this paper is to look at advances and obstacles to Equal Employment Opportunity for women in the various labor markets in the Asia-Pacific/Oceania region. Statistical sources are utilized when available, as well as narrative sources to augment statistics or when statistics are not made available.
In addition to employment and unemployment data, occupational data about women in traditional and non-traditional fields of employment for women, elite and lucrative occupations will be provided for some of the countries. Information about innovative programs utilized by government and private sector employers, initiatives to provide family-friendly workplaces, the existence of laws as well as enforcement of laws and regulations, monitoring, and equal employment opportunity programs in the various countries studied will also be presented.
When available, case studies of women in particular occupations will be provided for some of the countries, e.g. women in the legal profession, women in education, women in fields recently employing women, e.g. Information Technology.
Country data and discussion will be presented in regional order, i.e. East Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Oceania, and alphabetically within the region. It must be noted that certain countries provide extensive resources with respect to statistical data (e.g. Japan, Republic of Korea, Australia, New Zealand)[1], while others (India, People’s Republic of China, other LDC’s) do not provide current data or any data at all in some cases.
The United Nations Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) Status of Countries in the Asia-Pacific Oceania Regions
There are various aspects to country participation in the United Nations Convention on the Status of Women requirements. The first is signing and ratifying the Convention; the next is signing and ratifying the Optional Protocol,[2] which enables women to move on to the United Nations level when their country’s national machinery is ineffective in ending discrimination against women; the third is the opportunity to adopt temporary measures, including “positive action” or affirmative action, to improve equal opportunity for women in that country.
As of March 18, 2005, 180 countries, i.e. over 90 percent of the members of the United Nations, had become parties to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Recently, there were 98 signatures, 180 ratifications, accessions and successions to the Convention. States Parties in the Asia-Pacific/Oceania regions and their status are listed below:
Note: a= access; b= declarations or reservations; c= reservation subsequently withdrawn; d=succession
State Signature Ratification
Australia x x – a,b
Bangladesh x – a,b
Bhutan x x
Cambodia x x-a
China x-b x-b
Democratic
People’s Republic
of Korea x-a
India x-b x-b
Indonesia x x-b
Japan x x
Lao PDR x x
Malaysia x-a,b
Mongolia x x-c
Myanmar x-a,b
Nepal x x
New Zealand x x-b,c
Pakistan x-a,b
Philippines x x
Republic of Korea x-b x-b,c
Singapore x-a,b
Sri Lanka x x
Thailand x-a,b,c
Vietnam x x-b[3]
As of January 7, 2005, there were 76 signatories and 71 parties to the Optional Protocol to CEDAW. Those from the Asia-Pacific/Oceania region are:
Signature Ratification, Accession
Bangladesh x x
Cambodia x
Indonesia x
Mongolia x x
Nepal x
New Zealand x x
Philippines x x
Sri Lanka x
Thailand x x[4]
States parties were to submit reports approximately once every five years after ratification. Asia-Pacific/Oceania States parties and their submissions are:
State party Number of report Status of report
Australia Combined 4 and 5 To be examined at 34th session, 2006
Bangladesh 5th Discussed at 31st session, 2004
Bhutan Combined 1-6 Discussed at 31st session
Cambodia Combined 1-3 Submitted, not yet considered
China Combined 5-6 “
Democratic 1 Examined at 33rd session, 2005
People’s Republic of Korea
Fiji 1 Examined at 26th session, 2002
India 1 Examined at 22nd session, 2000
Indonesia 5th Received, not examined
Japan 5th Examined at 29th session, 2003
Lao PDR Combined 1-5 Examined at 32nd session, 2005
Malaysia Combined 1-2 Received, not examined
Mongolia Combined 3-4 Examined at 24th session, 2001
Myanmar 1 Examined at 22nd session, 2000
New Zealand 5th Examined at 29th session, 2003
Pakistan Combined 1-3 Received, not examined
Philippines Combined 5-6 Received, not yet considered
Republic 5th Received, not yet considered
of Korea
Singapore 3rd “
Sri Lanka Combined 3-4 Examined at 26th session, 2002
Thailand Combined 4-5 Received, not yet considered
Vanuatu Combined 1-3 “
Vietnam 5th Received[5]
General Recommendation No. 25, on article 4, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1999), describes temporary special measures that may be taken to accelerate equality of men and women. Excerpts follow:
II. Background: the object and purpose of the Convention
4. The scope and meaning of article 4, paragraph 1, must bedetermined in the
context of the overall object and purpose of the Convention, which is to eliminate all forms of discriminationagainst women with a view to achieving women’s de jure and defacto equality with men in the enjoyment of their human rights and fundamental freedoms. States parties to the Convention are under a legal obligation to respect, protect, promote and fulfil this right
To non-discrimination for women and to ensure the development andadvancement of women in order to improve their position to one ofde jure as well as de facto equality with men.
5. The Convention goes beyond the concept of discrimination used
in many national and international standards and norms….
6. A joint reading of articles 1 to 5 and 24, which form the general Interpretative
framework for all of the Convention’s substantive articles, indicates that three obligations are central to States parties’efforts to eliminate discrimination against women. These obligationsshould be implemented in an integrated fashion and extend beyond apurely formal legal obligation of equal treatment of women with men.
7. Firstly, States’ parties obligation is to ensure that there is no director indirect
discrimination against women in their laws and that women are protected against discrimination – committed by public authorities, the judiciary, organizations, enterprises or private individuals – in the public as well as the private spheres by competenttribunals as well as sanctions and other remedies. Secondly, States’
parties obligation is to improve the de facto position of women through concrete and effective policies and programmes. Thirdly,States’ parties obligation is to address prevailing gender relations andthe persistence of gender-based stereotypes that affect women not only through individual acts by individuals but also in law, and legaland societal structures and institutions.
8. In the Committee’s view, a purely formal legal or programmatic approach is not
sufficient to achieve women’s de facto equality with men, which the Committee interprets as substantive equality. In addition, the Convention requires that women have an equal start and that they be empowered by an enabling environment to achieve equality of results. It is not enough to guarantee women treatment that is identical to that of men. Rather, biological as well as socially and culturally constructed differences between men and women must be taken into account. Under certain circumstances, non-identical treatment of women and men will be required in order to address suchdifferences. Pursuit of the goal of substantive equality also calls for an effective strategy aimed at overcoming underrepresentation of women and a redistribution of resources and power between men and women…..
12. Certain groups of women, in addition to suffering from discrimination directed against them as women, may also suffer from multiple forms of discrimination based on additional grounds such as race, ethnic or religious identity, disability, age, class, caste or other factors. Such discrimination may affect these groups of women primarily, or to a different degree or in different ways than men. States parties may need to take specific temporary special measures to eliminate such multiple forms of discrimination against women and its compounded negative impact on them.
III. The meaning and scope of temporary special measures in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
Article 4, paragraph 1
Adoption by States parties of temporary special measures aimed at accelerating de facto equality between men and women shall not be considered discrimination as defined in the present Convention, but shall in no way entail as aconsequence the maintenance of unequal or separate standards; these measures shall be discontinued when the objectives of
equality of opportunity and treatment have been achieved.
Article 4, paragraph 2
Adoption by States parties of special measures, including those measures contained in the present Convention, aimed at protecting maternity, shall not be considered discriminatory.
C. Key elements of article 4, paragraph 1
18. Measures taken under article 4, paragraph 1, by States parties should aim to accelerate the equal participation of women in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field. The Committee views the application of these measures not as an exception to the norm of non-discrimination, but rather as an emphasis that temporary special measures are part of a necessary strategy by States parties directed towards the achievement of de factor or substantive equality of women with men in the enjoyment of their human rights and fundamental freedoms. While the application of temporary special measures often remedies the effects of past discrimination against women, the obligation of States parties under the Convention to improve the position of women to one of de facto or substantive equality with men exists irrespective of any proof of past discrimination…
IV. Recommendations to State Parties
35. The Committee draws attention to and reiterates its general recommendation No. 9, on statistical data concerning the situation of women, and recommends that States parties provide statistical data disaggregated by sex in order to measure the achievement of progress towards women’s de facto or substantive equality and the effectiveness of temporary special measures.
36. States parties should report on the type of temporary special measures
taken in specific fields under the relevant article(s) of the Convention.
Reporting under the respective article(s) should include references to
concrete goals and targets, timetables, the reasons for choosing particular
measures, steps to enable women to access such measures, and the
institution accountable for monitoring implementation and progress. States
parties are also asked to describe how many women are affected by a
measure, how many would gain access and participate in a certain field
because of a temporary special measure, or the amount of resources and
power it aims to redistribute to how many women, and within what time
frame.[6]
It should be noted that the government of Nepal, in its combined second and third periodic report of States parties to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (April 7, 2003) indicated: “With a view to accelerating the realization of gender equality, the Government has initiated some legal measures in favour of women. This is in line with Article 11(3) of the Constitution. The Local Self-Governance Act (1999), The Civil Service (First Amendment) Act (1998), and the Labour Act (1991) and Labour Regulations (1993) are examples.”[7]
As will be seen in the following statistical presentations and narrative information, few countries in the Asia-Pacific/Oceania region have proceeded to the point at which equal employment opportunity has been achieved.[8] There are many issues to be resolved, and the lack of statistics does not permit countries to begin to assess what they need to do to come into actual compliance with CEDAW, to engage in policy, planning and to launch programs and remedial steps --- and not to merely engage in formalities and rhetoric.[9]
There are not only national sources, but international sources of gender and employment data. The International Labor Organization provides certain types of data[10], but they fall short of giving the full picture of where women are in the economy in terms of work in the formal and informal sectors, earnings rates, demographics of women who are working and types of jobs/occupations in which they are working, legal protections and the effectiveness of protections from unequal working standards and conditions, sexual harassment at work, ages, marital status, parental status and disabled or non-disabled status of women workers (including multiple factors, e.g. older women, disabled women, women who are married or parents). In addition, in some countries in the region, non-national women (refugees, expatriates, contract workers in menial jobs), etc. are not reflected in the national data reported by the various nations. Their invisibility and powerlessness in finding redress under national laws for employment discrimination is reported in few publications.[11]
Here is a limited statistical snapshot of some of the countries in the region:
INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATION DATA
INDONESIA
MALE AND FEMALE LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE (KILM 1)
Number of persons in the labor force as a percentage of population (15 to 64 years)
1995 1996 1997 1999 2000 2001
Female 54.8 53.1 51.5 53.2
Male 84.2 86.6 84.9 86.3
Male & Female 69.4 69.6 67.9 69.6 67.8 68.6[12]
Unemployment Rate (KILM 8a)
Number of persons unemployed as a percentage of labor force (KILM 8a)
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Female 5.1
Male 3.3
Male & Female 4.0 4.7 5.5 6.4 6.1[13]
JAPAN
LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE (KILM 1)
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Female 59.7 59.8 59.5 59.6 60.1 59.7
Male 85.4 85.3 85.3 85.2 85.0 84.8
Male & Female 72.6 72.6 72.4 72.5 72.6 72.3[14]
EMPLOYMENT-TO-POPULATION RATIO (KILM 2)
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Female 48.7 48.1 47.4 47.1 46.8 46.1
Male 75.1 74.1 73.2 72.6 71.7 70.6
Male & Female 61.5 60.7 59.9 59.5 58.9 57.9[15]
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (KILM 8a)
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Female 3.4 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.8 5.1
Male 3.4 4.1 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.6
Male & Female 3.4 4.1 4.7 4.8 5.0 5.4[16]
PART-TIME WORKERS
Part-time employment as a percent of total employment
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Female 37.6 38.2 38.9 37.9 40.1 40.2
Male 12.7 12.7 13.2 11.4 13.4 13.7
Male & Female 22.8 23.1 23.7 22.2 24.4 24.6[17]
NEW ZEALAND – LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION RATE (KILM 1)
Number of persons in the labor force as a percentage of population (15 to 64 years)
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Female 67.1 67.4 67.5 68.5 69.1
Male 83.5 83.2 83.2 83.4 83.9