68 Finance & economics The EconomistFebruary 8th 2020
O
ver thepast generation women have made substantial eco-
nomic gains, even as progress on other measures of social
equality has been uneven. Their average level of education has
caught up to that of men across rich and poor countries alike. In-
deed in much of the rich world the share of young women with a
college degree is now above that of men. Income may be divided
less equally across the workforce as a whole, but it has become
more evenly spread between men and women. In America women
account for nearly 30% of the top tenth of earners, up from 5% in
the 1960s. That said, progress is far from complete. Gaps in labour-
force participation and pay persist. The nature of the obstacles
holding back further progress has changed. Although economics
ought to be keenly interested in such matters, not least because of
gender inequalities in the profession, it has not always been of
much help in understanding them. That is changing, however, in
ways that could transform the field.
This evolution was apparent in January, in a lecture given by
Marianne Bertrand of the University of Chicago. Over the past few
decades, gender gaps in the rich world have had ever less to do with
overt discrimination, she argued, and ever more to do with wom-
en’s decisions. Their choice of degree subject is one. Jobs in sci-
ence, technology, engineering and maths have smaller gender pay
gaps than others. But men are around twice as likely as women to
graduate in such fields. More powerful still is the effect of child-
birth. The birth of a first child has essentially no effect on a man’s
earnings trajectory. By contrast a woman experiences a profound
and lasting hit to her pay. The motherhood penalty, suggested Ms
Bertrand, is easily the largest remaining contributor to gender
gaps in labour markets.
Men and women alike opt to become parents, of course. But the
unequal effect on earnings reflects their different responses to
childbirth. Women are more likely to leave the labour force or to
switch to part-time work. They often choose jobs that allow more
flexibility, and accept lower pay as a consequence. Some studies,
for instance, suggest that women take jobs with shorter com-
mutes, to make time for their care responsibilities. In France, not-
ed Ms Bertrand, the sacrifice in earnings associated with such de-
cisions is estimated to explain 10-15% of the gender pay gap. It iswomen’s greater willingness to accept these trade-offs that ac-
counts for diverging labour-market fortunes.
Economists, historically, have let the matter rest there, chalk-
ing such choices up to rational self-interest. Perhaps families de-
cide that women have a comparative advantage in child-rearing,
and should handle the parenting while men focus on their careers.
Gary Becker, the late Nobel prize-winning economist, argued that
households specialise in this way. Alternatively, perhaps women’s
choices simply reveal their preferences: for subjects other than
maths, for instance; or for time spent caring for children, rather
than long hours at the office. And such preferences, economists
have generally assumed, are to be taken as given. De gustibus non
est disputandum, they say: there is no accounting for tastes.
But perhaps there is. As Ms Bertrand noted in her lecture, other
social sciences, like social psychology, reckon that preferences are
socially determined. In this view, people’s choices are influenced
by norms, which specify the roles and behaviours that are appro-
priate for men and women. Survey evidence shows that, across a
broad range of rich and poor countries, both men and women sup-
port the view that men should be first in line for a vacancy when
jobs are scarce. The level of support varies—for instance it is much
higher in Egypt than in Switzerland. But even in Switzerland,
roughly a fifth of women agreed with the statement, similar to the
share of men. Gender gaps in maths scores are larger in places
where gender attitudes are more conservative. This suggests that
social influences matter.
Defying social norms is possible but costly. Men who sacrifice
their careers to raise children while their partners work may bear
emotional costs, if, say, they are seen as being unmanly. Similarly,
women who are seen to put their career before their family may
face an emotional toll, related to their own guilt or the judgment of
others, because of their decision to flout gender norms. The
choices made under these pressures are still voluntary, but they re-
flect the influence of a self-perpetuating gender bias. Human re-
sources may be allocated across the economy in a way that reflects
this bias, rather than people’s abilities. Economists know these bi-
ases exist. Historically, however, they have tended to regard them
as blunt descriptions of the state of the world, rather than evolving
social forces that influence behaviour.Puncturing the patriarchy
Mitigating bias is not easy. Seemingly helpful interventions, such
as generous maternity leave, can backfire if they reinforce the
norm that women are natural caregivers. Better, Ms Bertrand ar-
gued, to favour measures that have no such implications, such as
generous support for child care. Her own research suggests that a
mother’s working status shapes her children’s perceptions of la-
bour-market norms. Those surrounding men’s behaviour matter
too. Survey evidence from Japan suggests that many men feel posi-
tively about taking paternity leave. But, because they wrongly be-
lieve other men do not feel the same way, they take less time off
than they would like. Firms could potentially make their workers
better off by, say, choosing to make paternity leave mandatory.
Ms Bertrand’s arguments may not seem particularly subver-
sive. But they carry implications that extend beyond gender dis-
crimination. Her analysis suggests that the decision to participate
in a market is not simply about maximising utility given a set of
tastes and constraints. Markets, rather, are part of a suite of fluid
social forces that shape behaviour. Economists cannot claim to
understand the markets until they understand those forces. 7Free exchange Progress of a sort
Economists discover the power of social norms to influence decisions