Gender, Policy and Social Engineering
by Stuart Birks
Director, Centre for Public Policy Evaluation,
Massey University, Palmerston North
K.S.Birks@massey.ac.nz
Paper presented at the New Zealand Association of Economists 1998 Annual Conference
Wellington, 3 September 1998
Abstract
Gender analysis is being increasingly used in policy development and evaluation. This paper:
1. What is Gender Analysis?
1.1 Gender analysis from Beijing
There are several references to gender analysis in the Report of the (United Nations) Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing, China, 4-15 September 1995 (gopher://gopher.undp.org/00/unconfs/women/off/a--20.en). Among other things, it is stated that governments should "integrate gender analysis into policies and programmes" (Chapter V.A).
Strategic objective H.3 is to "Generate and disseminate gender-disaggregated data and information for planning and evaluation". This includes the following requirements (not in order, my emphases):
"Ensure that statistics related to individuals are collected, compiled, analysed and presented by sex and age and reflect problems, issues and questions related to women and men in society;"
"Improve data collection on the full contribution of women and men to the economy, including their participation in the informal sector(s);"
"Ensure the regular production of a statistical publication on gender that presents and interprets topical data on women and men in a form suitable for a wide range of non-technical users;"
"Improve concepts and methods of data collection on the measurement of poverty among women and men, including their access to resources;"
"Improve concepts and methods of data collection on the participation of women and men with disabilities, including their access to resources."
The above appear to place equal emphasis on gathering information on men as on women. While the following refers to centres for women’s studies, there is still reference to appropriate indicators and methodologies, and the need to test these:
"Involve centres for women's studies and research organizations in developing and testing appropriate indicators and research methodologies to strengthen gender analysis, as well as in monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the goals of the Platform for Action;"
The odd one out refers to violence. While apparently calling for gender-disaggregated data on victims, only violence against women is mentioned:
"Develop improved gender-disaggregated and age-specific data on the victims and perpetrators of all forms of violence against women, such as domestic violence, sexual harassment, rape, incest and sexual abuse, and trafficking in women and girls, as well as on violence by agents of the State;"
The impression is that gender analysis is generally intended to be based on a balanced research methodology in terms of who are consulted and on whom data are gathered.
Paradoxically, and suggestive of advocacy research, while calling for gender analysis to be undertaken so as to identify issues, the results are already presumed in strategy objective I:
"I. Human rights of women
222. If the goal of full realization of human rights for all is to be achieved, international human rights instruments must be applied in such a way as to take more clearly into consideration the systematic and systemic nature of discrimination against women that gender analysis has clearly indicated."
1.2 Gender Analysis in New Zealand
In 1996 the Ministry of Women's Affairs issued a publication called, The Full Picture: Guidelines for Gender Analysis. This document specifies the requirements for gender analysis in New Zealand. They differ somewhat from those in the Beijing document. To quote:
"What is gender analysis?
Gender analysis:
· examines the differences in women's and men's lives, including those which lead to social and economic inequity for women, and applies this understanding to policy development and service delivery;
· is concerned with the underlying causes of these inequities;
· aims to achieve positive change for women."
It looks for and attempts to overcome inequities for women, but not for men. The identification of inequities involves the selection of indicators, obtaining the data, and applying value judgements to say whether a higher number is better or worse. There is scope for debate at each of these stages. A balanced approach would accept that the perspectives of all participants must be considered. The New Zealand approach to gender analysis aims to improve the position of women where they are considered to be disadvantaged, but to do nothing where they are considered to be advantaged. By focusing on disadvantage and overlooking areas of advantage, a distorted picture is presented. This is likely to result in inappropriate recommendations.
The publication on gender analysis does not define equity, except to say that equality is not equity, because men's and women's lives are different (pages 7 and 8). With selective choice of criteria and a focus solely on women, there is great scope for fundamentally inequitable outcomes.
Under "Guidelines for Action" (page 24), there is a sub-heading, "Consultation". There are 5 points - four refer to consultation with women:
"Consultation
The fifth is not: "begin consulting with men at the outset"; nor is it "consider whether groups or individual men should be consulted, the time of day......."; or "consult with different groups of men"; or "allow men time to consult amongst themselves". It is, "Seek the advice and assistance of the Ministry of Women's Affairs on key gender-specific issues concerning social and political policy development."
Not only are the issues selected with a pro-women focus (or perhaps more accurately a feminist focus), but the whole approach to gathering information appears to exclude input from men.
On page 8 there is the claim that, "Gender analysis provides a basis for robust analysis of the differences between women's and men's lives, and this removes the possibility of analysis being based on incorrect assumptions and stereotypes."
It is difficult to see how this can be the case when there is no provision for equal consultation with men. Also an approach based on gendered groupings will result in explanations reliant on stereotypes as explained in 1.3 below. It is hard to see how such an approach can meet the claim, in the title of the document, that it gives "the full picture".
1.3 Aggregation issues
All data other than unit record data involve groupings (and even unit records of flow data commonly involve grouping into discrete time intervals). The results obtained will be influenced by the groupings chosen. Put simply, if data are grouped by gender, "gender issues" are identified, if by class, "class issues", similarly if by ethnicity, race issues, by region, regional issues, and so on.
This is an aggregation problem. Ideally within group differences are minimal and between group differences are clearly observable (otherwise why distinguish between the groups?). Studies based on grouped data can be misleading if there are large within group differences, and especially if there are large overlaps between groups on relevant characteristics (as frequently applies with gender groupings).
If desired, discrimination against a specified group can be shown through the selection of appropriate indicators and the application of suitable interpretations to the results. It may also be possible to hide the privileges of one group by combining with a large disadvantaged group. The validity of this approach could be challenged, but sometimes the structure and processes of the organisations involved in the research are such that there is inadequate scrutiny. This is a danger with gender analysis.
The result could be the one-sided correction of inequalities, which is inherently inequitable in the long run.
2. Applications of Gender Analysis
This section outlines some applications of gendered perspectives.
2.1 The Women’s Access to Justice Project
The terms of reference of the Women’s Access to Justice Project are reproduced in appendix I. In brief, they state that the Law Commission will examine the response of the legal system to the experiences of women in New Zealand with emphasis on family and domestic relationships, violence against women, and the economic position of women.
There is an emphasis on consultation with women, and an assumption that women are disadvantaged. The language and approach show that this project fits under the umbrella of gender analysis as specified by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs.
In the project’s 1995 publication, Overview of Law Commission's project and issues arising in the consultation sessions to date, the following specific issues are identified: matrimonial property; de facto property; maintenance - child support; custody - guardianship; adoption; ACC - medical misadventure, lump sum compensation, unpaid work in the home; DSW benefits - income support; superannuation; tax; employment law - sexual harassment, pay equity, child care, parental leave; property division upon death; domestic violence; rape law; other crimes of violence against women; defences to murder; legal aid; sexual abuse of children; prostitution; criminalisation/institutionalisation of women. These issues are not only of interest to women.
The approach is one of identification of and correction for areas of perceived disadvantage for women, while no action is needed where women are considered to be favoured. There is therefore an inherent bias built in to the approach. The outcome leads to perspectives such as the following: If women's material standard of living falls on separation, that should be corrected, but if men's material standard of living falls on marriage, that is irrelevant. If women have difficulty obtaining child support, that should be corrected, but if men are obstructed from seeing their children, that is irrelevant. If women are found to have more difficulty than men in getting paid employment, that should be corrected, but if men have difficulty getting custody, that is irrelevant.
This one-sided approach is unlikely to result in satisfactory changes in law or legal processes. The project is discussed at length in Birks S (1998) Gender Analysis and the Women's Access to Justice Project, Issues Paper Number 2, Centre for Public Policy Evaluation, Massey University.
It is interesting to note that this international convention makes reference to men in parenting roles:
Article 5
States Parties shall take all appropriate measures:
To modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women;
To ensure that family education includes a proper understanding of maternity as a social function and the recognition of the common responsibility of men and women in the upbringing and development of their children, it being understood that the interest of the children is the primordial consideration in all cases.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child makes similar points, see appendix II.
A 1980 amendment to the Guardianship Act 1968 was also intended to eliminate gender bias on custody matters. Section 23.1.a states that:
"For the purposes of this section, and regardless of the age of a child, there shall be no presumption that the placing of a child in the custody of a particular person will, because of the sex of that person, best serve the welfare of that child."
The second reading of the Guardianship Amendment Bill (No.2) was on 27 November 1980. This was the amendment that introduced the section. Hon J.K.McLay (then Minister of Justice) said:
"There are those who believe that fathers do not gain custody of their children more often because the judiciary discriminates in favour of mothers. If any lingering trace of the so-called mother principle does in fact survive, it will be eradicated by the proposed new subsection (1A) of section 23, inserted by clause 8 of the Bill."
New Zealand Parliamentary Debates, Vol.435 (Nov 6-Nov 27 1980), page 5432
Some would question whether the amendment has met these expectations, given the processes of the Family Court and application of the law. On the broader issue of common responsibility of both parents for the "upbringing and development" of their children, the Family Court does not appear to be supportive. The following is from 60 Minutes, TV1, TVNZ, broadcast on 5th January 1997:
Narrator: "Judge Mahony generally believes that young children are better off in one home."
Chief Family Court Judge Patrick Mahony: "Young children need routine. Their sense of security is often built around familiarity of environment, familiarity and consistency of caregiving. Those are very important factors for young children. Their bonding is very closely tied to their sense of security."
This has been taken to mean not just young children, but all children, and has resulted in a marked lack of support for shared custody arrangements. This raises the question as to why gender analysis has not been applied to criticise the Court. It may be that the responsibility of men for children is only selectively referred to. In custody disputes, women who wish to share are able to do so, but those who do not want to share are currently able to use the Court to exclude fathers. Interestingly, Kuhn and Guidubaldi, looking at US data, found that:
"States with high levels of joint physical custody awards (over 30%) in 1989 and 1990 have shown significantly greater declines in divorce rates in following years through 1995, compared with other states. Divorce rates declined nearly four times faster … As a result, the states with high levels of joint custody now have significantly lower divorce rates on average than other states. … These findings indicate that public policies promoting sole custody may be contributing to the high divorce rate." (Kuhn R and Guidubaldi J, 1997, "Child Custody Policies and Divorce Rates in the United States": http://www.vix.com/crc/sp/spcrc97.htm)
The use of the Court to exclude fathers is an example of "gatekeeping" by mothers, a phenomenon which has long been observed. Gatekeeping is mentioned, for example, in Doherty W J, Kouneski E F and Erickson M F (1998) "Responsible Fathering: An Overview and Conceptual Framework", Journal of Marriage and the Family, May, 60, pp.277-292. While recognising the important contribution fathers can make, the paper acknowledges that "substantial barriers stand in the way of active, involved fathering ... even within satisfactory marital relationships, a father’s involvement with his children, especially young children, is often contingent on the mother’s attitudes toward, expectations of, and support for the father" (pp.286-7). The authors cite studies indicating that, "many mothers are ambivalent about the fathers’ active involvement with their children" (p.287). By way of explanation, they say that, "active paternal involvement would threaten some women’s identity and sense of control over this central domain of their lives" (p.287).
The New Zealand Government’s report on CEDAW was called the Status of Women in New Zealand 1998 (see: http://www.mwa.govt.nz/annual/cedaw/httoc.html). Its section on stereotyping is as follows:
"STEREOTYPING
Images of women in the media inform and influence society about women’s roles and how a society values or treats women. New Zealand censorship law is drawn from the public view that there should be some constraints on the level of violence and negative images of people portrayed in the media. In addition to the work of the Office of Film and Literature Classification, images of women in the media are regulated through the Advertising Standards Authority and the Broadcasting Standards Authority."
There is no mention of men’s roles or stereotyping, or of men as parents.
Article 16 is on marriage and family life. It includes the following:
"(d) the same rights and responsibilities as parents, irrespective of their marital status, in matters relating to their children; in all cases the interests of the children shall be paramount;
(f) the same rights and responsibilities with regard to guardianship, wardship, trusteeship and adoption of children, or similar institutions where these concepts exist in national legislation; in all cases the interests of children shall be paramount;"
Subsection 6.2 of the Guardianship Act 1968 states:
"(2) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the mother of a child shall be the sole guardian of the child if---
(ii) Her marriage to the father of the child was dissolved before the child was conceived; and
(b) She and the father of the child were not living together as husband and wife at the time the child was born."
This issue is likely to become increasingly important given Ian Pool’s observation, "Another emerging trend, less widely known at the popular level, is for couples to live separately, often with parents, yet at the same time pursuing an intimate relationship." (Pool I (1998), "The Family Court in 2015: The Socio-Demographic Context", Proceedings of the New Zealand Law Society Family Law Conference, Christchurch, p.318). It was not identified as a problem in the report.
Section 10 is on education. Under "examinations and qualifications" it points out that:
"More females than males leave the schooling system with a high academic qualification. In 1996, 16,881 females (67 percent) left school with sixth form certificate or better, compared with 15,413 males (59 percent). Twenty of the 36 top scholars recognised by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority in 1997 were female.
Females were more likely than males to gain an A or B grade in School Certificate in 1996, with the most significant difference in English. In University Bursary and Entrance Scholarship examinations in 1996, slightly more females than males gained a B grade or higher."
Given the focus of the report, this would be seen as a success. If the figures by gender were reversed, presumably it would be viewed as a problem.
To summarise, there are articles in the Convention which refer to men and under which it could be claimed that there is discrimination against men in New Zealand. Such concerns are not addressed in the official New Zealand report.
2.3 Future Income and the Matrimonial Property Amendment and De Facto Relationship (Property) Bills
Proposed changes are intended to overcome claimed disadvantages for women in existing legislation.
It has been suggested that post-separation income should be considered as part of matrimonial property. Bridge went so far as to argue for equalising post-separation incomes:
"If the matrimonial home and balance property were re-allocated on the basis of future needs and resources the presumption of equality would mean an equality of future result."
Bridge C, "Reallocation of Property after Marriage Breakdown", in Henaghan M and Atkin B (eds) (1992) Family Law Policy in New Zealand, OUP.
The issue came up in the Family Court in the case of B v B (1997 NZFLR 217), where it was ruled that post-separation income counts as matrimonial property under the current Matrimonial property Act, but this was overturned at appeal (Z v Z 1997 NZFLR 241). Nevertheless the point continues to be made. Terence Arnold QC, writing in the July 1998 issue of the Law and Economics Association of New Zealand Newsletter, states that, as separating couples generally have little matrimonial property, "Of much greater practical importance is the income-earning ability of the respective spouses". He goes on to say that, "Economists have tended to look at the marriage unit as a firm seeking to maximise the joint production and acquisition of commodities ...", and, " ... many writers argue for long-term post-dissolution income sharing".
The lobby group, Divorce Equity, has a template for submissions on the Matrimonial Property Amendment Bill. It contains suggestions that, "Even when the children have grown up, a ‘clean break’ principle can be unfair if it means that a low-earner wife does not get any share of a spouse’s future income through spousal maintenance payments", and "An equality of outcome principle must govern law reform" with additional reference to "income-generating capacity" as matrimonial property. This seems to be another example of selecting suitable indicators and applying appropriate interpretations so as to show "disadvantage" for women.
There is a clear assumption in both these documents that the only significant thing to come out of a marriage is the earning capacity of the main income earner (assumed to be the man). One has to wonder why men marry. Is it simply to increase their earning power, and if so, is marriage the only determinant of their earnings? Other factors which appear to be overlooked include:
Differences in earning power before marriage.
The relative efforts of the partners required to achieve any increase in earnings (if such an increase arises).
If women suffer a loss in earning power due to dropping out of the workforce, who choses this, and who benefits from this? (Note the description of "hidden dependency needs" in Cowan C and Kinder M (1986) Smart Women, Foolish Choices, Bantam, pp.46-55. Also in Kingma D R (1993) The Men We Never Knew: Women's Role in the Evolution of a Gender, Millenium, " ... in general women aren't able to acknowledge their unconscious desire to keep men in the protector role or to realise how much emotional safety men's occupying that role has granted them ... ", p.92.)
If there is a presumption of balancing unequal paid contributions with unequal unpaid contributions, why consider only post-separation earnings and not post-separation unpaid work? Feminist economists appear to be selective in their reference to unpaid work, as discussed in Birks S (1995) "Review of Women and Economics: a New Zealand Feminist Perspective, by Prue Hyman", New Zealand Economic Papers, Vol. 29(1), June, pp.103-110.
In practice, "unpaid" work can be very highly paid even under current legislation, as discussed in Birks S. (1994) Women, Families and Unpaid Work, Discussion Paper No. 94.9, School of Applied and International Economics, Massey University
There appears to be a presumption in much of the debate that people have one relationship in their lifetimes (hence, for example, women do not repartner and again exchange unpaid work for a share of another partner’s income, and men do not have to pay a subsequent partner to be in a relationship with them). The point is made in both these documents, but not as a factor for redefining the issue as a whole.
If people marry in part to have a family, then in many cases a man is accepting the burden of financially supporting his partner and the children so as to enable the woman to concentrate on caring for the children. There is a benefit in this for her, but his sacrifice during the marriage is not recognised.
Instead, it is suggested that he should continue to contribute financially (equalised income) in addition to paying child support, while having neither the benefit of a partner’s unpaid work, nor the pleasures of a family life with his children.
There is also the presumption that his only value to the family is through his earnings, and that these can be obtained without his having anything in return, including rights to contact, or guardianship rights. Although such rights may be specified in law and in court orders, they are not enforced and can be taken away if, for example, there is conflict between the parents. Such conflict could be caused by either party, including unilaterally by the mother.
It is imprudent to rely on one perspective only when considering an issue. There are alternative perspectives which could be taken. By way of illustration, I present one here. Instead of considering a woman requiring compensation for making career sacrifices in marriage, we could consider a woman placing particular value on being able to spend time with her children rather than having to undertake full-time paid work. She would therefore be drawn to men who could support her while she brings up her children. She favours a marriage partner with high earning potential, so men wishing to marry invest in their careers so as to show such potential. A man wanting to be a father recognises that, in order to do so, he has to earn a high enough income and must therefore accept limited time with his children. She becomes the primary caregiver because his financial support allows her to spend time with the children. She is also able to keep him in a secondary parenting role by means of "gatekeeping" tactics as mentioned in 2.2 above.
Once there are children, she pays less attention to him, and he has the choice of either accepting this, or leaving. If she does not want him there, she can force a separation anyway. At this point she can deny him guardianship and access rights, while still collecting child support. He has therefore been supporting a wife during his marriage, against his will in the case of "hidden dependency needs" as well as supporting his children, and he continues to pay after separation with few or no direct benefits to him. With post-separation income equalisation, there would be no financial penalties to her from separation, save the possible loss of household economies of scale (although these can be countered by family support payments and other benefits, and possible savings if he is allowed "enjoyment of access" as this is at his expense while having no effect on child support liabilities). Under such a system, there are strong incentives for women to marry and then separate. Men should be far more cautious, however, although there is little a man can do to protect himself save avoid marriage and, given proposed legislation, de facto relationships. (The economic nature of the "contract" between a husband and wife is discussed in Birks S. (1994) Women, Families and Unpaid Work, Discussion Paper No. 94.9, School of Applied and International Economics, Massey University).
2.4 The Statistics New Zealand/Ministry of Women’s Affairs Time Use Survey
While not a direct application of gender analysis, there are reasons for concern as to whether this survey, the results of which are eagerly awaited, is entirely gender-neutral. The following material is reproduced from Appendix V of Birks S (1998) Gender Analysis and the Women’s Access to Justice Project, Issues Paper No. 2, Centre for Public Policy Evaluation, Massey University.
Statistics New Zealand is currently undertaking a survey under contract to the Ministry of Women’s Affairs. The Ministry has been allocated $2 million to fund the survey. To quote from the survey newsletter, Time Use Survey Update No.1, Statistics New Zealand and Ministry of Women’s Affairs, November 1997:
"The Ministry of Women's Affairs is the sponsor for the survey and Judy Lawrence, Chief Executive, Ministry of Women's Affairs, chairs the steering committee which oversees the survey. Statistics New Zealand will conduct the survey, including developing the survey methodology, collecting, processing and analysing the data. Marilyn Waring, author of the 1988 book Counting for Nothing, is providing expert advice to the Ministry of Women's Affairs on the development of the survey." (page 1)
Marilyn Waring has been outspoken on the need for time use information.
In Counting for Nothing (Waring M, 1988, Counting for Nothing: What Men Value and What Women are Worth, Allen and Unwin), Waring suggested that a Canadian housewife does 96 hours of unpaid work per week of "slave labour" (pp. 100-103). However, in 1992, Canadian women with children under 5 whose main work was keeping house spent an average of 8.5 hours per day on unpaid work (from A Portrait of Families in Canada, Statistics Canada, 1993.) This totals 59.5 hours per week.
By 1996 she was claiming that women work 16-18 hours per day (Massey Focus, 1996, Issue 1). This would leave only 6-8 hours a day for other activities including sleep, or a maximum of 56 hours sleep per week. Table 160 of Schmittroth L (ed), (1991) Statistical Record of Women Worldwide, London: Gale Research, gives women's sleeping hours as: US 59.9; Japan 57.0; USSR 58.2; Finland 60.9; Sweden 56.9. If they sleep for these numbers of hours, they are awake for less than 16 hours a day. Waring must be claiming that women work in their sleep.
While that is implausible, the current study may support Waring's claims in a way that previous studies have failed to do. This is because the study appears to go against two recognised practices for time diary studies.
Robinson J P and Bostrom A (1994) "The over-estimated workweek? What time diary measures suggest", Monthly Labor Review, 117 (8): 11-23, compare time diary studies with studies asking people to estimate work undertaken. Firstly, they say that surveys are poorer than time diaries at estimating work weeks because, inter alia, other activities may be undertaken during working hours. The draft diaries for this study specifically state, "Don't write all the things you do as part of your paid work (just put "at work"), but do write down what you do in your lunch and coffee breaks."
Secondly, diaries are better because people are less able to distort the results, and because "they are not told which activities are of survey interest". In this study, the emphasis on caring activities in the draft diaries shows very clearly what is of interest.
The draft pilot survey 48-hour diary has 2 pages for each 2 hours. The right-hand page is for people to fill in themselves, saying "What are you doing?" and "What else are you doing?" This allows for a main activity and then all others. The left hand page is to be ignored, "The interviewer will fill those in with you". It has the following columns:
- caring or helping - child or person with sickness or disability (child 0-4, child 5-13, 14+, sick/disabled)
- other unpaid work for other household or person
- work for organisation
It seems as if the study is designed to maximise the time recorded as being available (including when asleep during the night?). It is also likely to favour women if the interviewers assign nights to mothers/women. The time recorded as active care simply means that one of the activities has to involve the child/person (such as having a coffee with a friend while "overseeing" and/or occasionally talking to the children in the room?).
Time spent actively or available for "caring" seems to be the main focus of the study, given that half the time diary is devoted to it, and also the individuals are not left to fill in those pages themselves.
Non-custodial parents should be particularly concerned about how their time is recorded. It seems that they do not care for their children. Time with their children would be measured as voluntary informal community work with children not from their household (unless their children are counted as part of their household). Similarly, their time "available for care" would not be recorded. The special parts for analysts to fill in count time when someone is available for children of their household, and time when someone is active with someone from their household (irrespective of whether it is the main or other activity), but only time actively caring for a child not from your household.
More generally, time "on call" for children counts, but time "on call" for work is overlooked. The income figures follow those in the census, hence they do not allow for child support paid, or tax on child support, thus overstating the income of non-custodial parents. Nor do they acknowledge that children may be in the care of non-custodial parents for a considerable part of the time. Similarly there is no mention that child support is tax free to the recipient or that the children may not be in the care of the custodial parent all the time. The study is likely to generally overstate the caring input of mothers (important in custody issues), while understating men’s paid and unpaid work time. It is also likely to understate the parenting input of non-custodial parents as well as understating custodial parents’ incomes and overstating the incomes of non-custodial parents.
There are other questions which could be raised about the study.
What is being measured in unpaid work? Not actual inputs because multiple activities are possible, not contribution to household because unpaid work solely for one’s self is included, not types of activity because paid work is not disaggregated, not effort put in because just hours are recorded, not input as a proxy for benefit gained because leisure time gives benefits also. Should we count one hour of primary activity as an hour if other activities are also occurring? That might overstate hours worked. What about secondary activities, how should they be included, if at all?
If the distinction between time on paid versus unpaid work is considered important, perhaps it would be more accurate if non-custodial parents were to record the time they spend to earn the child support and associated tax as time spent doing unpaid work for another household or person, and to provide income figures after having deducted child support and associated income tax.
While this study is being promoted as offering important information which was not previously available, in fact some information has been available for New Zealand and other countries. This available information does not support the claims being made about women’s significantly greater overall work contribution. In fact, if women’s unpaid work is unrecognised, then surely men’s is even less acknowledged. There are grounds for us to be suspicious of the results of this survey.
2.5 Domestic Violence Studies
In 1995 the Department of Justice published a report, Hitting Home - Men speak about abuse of women partners by Leibrich J, Paulin J and Ransom R. It reported on two studies. One was a sample of 2000 men and the other was a follow up survey of 200 of these men. It focused on men’s abuse of women, asking about their attitudes to specified types of physical and psychological abuse of women and their actual behaviour. Psychological abuse included "puts down her family and friends" (described by some as "criticised his mother-in-law"), and "tries to keep her form doing something she wants to do". In a special edition of the Criminal Justice Quarterly, August 1995, the authors say that:
"We believe that before you can change behaviour, you have to understand its origins, motivation and process. Documenting what men do and what they believe about domestic abuse is crucial in understanding the problem." (page 2)
It is notable that the men were not asked if they had ever experienced any of these behaviours from women, or why they had acted in the specified ways. There were no equivalent studies of women to assess their attitudes to and prevalence rates of physical and psychological abuse of male partners. Respondents were considered to be psychologically abusive if, for example, they thought it was "okay in some circumstances" to "prevent her from having money for her own use", or to "try to keep her from doing something she wants to do". In other words, for a man not to be psychologically abusive, he would have to consider it aways acceptable for her to do what she wanted and to spend money however she chose. Given that relationships frequently involve co-operation and compromise, this is a remarkable prespective. Perhaps surprisingly, 67% of respondents thought that it was never okay to try to keep a woman from doing what she wants, and 87% thought it was never okay to prevent a woman from having money for her own use. It raises questions about the content of stopping violence programmes for men, and whether the proponents of these views have the same expectations of women.
The one-sided approach seen in "Hitting Home" is also apparent in the Hamilton Abuse Intervention Pilot Project, which has an Assailant/Men’s programme and a Victim/Women’s programme (see appendices B and C of Robertson N, Busch R, Ave K and Balzer R (October 1991) The Hamilton Abuse Intervention Pilot Project: The First Three Months, Family Violence Prevention Co-ordinating Committee).
Studies which look at both men and women find similar prevalence rates by men and women, as described in section 5.5 of Birks S (1998) Gender Analysis and the Women’s Access to Justice Project, Issues Paper No. 2, Centre for Public Policy Evaluation, Massey University.
The one-sided and distorted perspective has an impact beyond domestic violence legislation. Susan Snively undertook an economic assessment of the costs of domestic violence, published as Snively S (1994) The New Zealand Economic Cost of Family Violence, Family Violence Unit, Department of Social Welfare. Prevalence figures were determined by discussion with participants at a seminar, many of whom were policy analysts and advisors from the public sector:
"The seminar participants expressed different views on the prevalence of family violence. There was agreement to use 1:4, 1:7 and 1:10 ratios to estimate the number of families experiencing family violence (survivors). For this project these ratios were applied to estimate the number of women and children without any attempt to adjust for family types." (p.6)
It is stated on page 11 that the perpetrators are "largely men". All the victims ("survivors") are assumed to be women and children. It is assumed that, in a family experiencing violence, all the women and children, but none of the men, are "survivors". It is not explained how a boy can be a survivor, but once he turns 14 he can only be a perpetrator (see footnote 4 on page 44 of Snively, op. cit.).
On this basis, the economic cost of family violence was determined.
2.6 Superannuation
The following comment was made on the proposed Retirement Savings Scheme in the Ministry of Women’s Affairs Annual Report 1996/97, (http://www.mwa.govt.nz/annual/1997/policy.html#Income) "Critical issues addressed included the differences in lifetime earnings between men and women"
Similarly Hyman states that, "Women are less favourably placed to save significant amounts" Hyman P (1994) Women and Economics: a New Zealand Feminist Perspective, Bridget Williams, p.193.
The focus is on individual earnings, without consideration for intra-family transfers. This is puzzling given the the attention given to such transfers in the intra-family income study conducted by Fleming R and Easting S K and completed in 1994 (see, for example, Easting S K and Fleming R (1994) Families, Money and Policy, Intra Family Income Project, Wellington and Social Policy Research Centre, Massey University).
In fact it might be more realistic, given the Matrimonial Property Act, to suggest that it is men who have difficulty holding on to their retirement savings. The value at date of separation includes the effects of all contributions to that date, even if some were made prior to marriage or even during a previous marriage. Nevertheless separating spouses can generally expect to receive a half share. The funds or entitlement that someone receives as a result of an ex-spouse’s superannuation is not considered as matrimonial property in future relationships unless it is specifically made so. In addition, men’s superannuation contributions would include a premium to cover the possibility of ongoing liability for their longer-lived widows.
3. Implications
There are dimensions other than gender which may shape perceptions, and analysts should be alert to the danger of distortions associated with those, but this paper focuses on gender. Distortions may result from any approach which involves simplification, as with aggregation or selecting "key" variables. In some cases distortions are intentional, however.
Recently some people have been informally making reference to "advocacy research". While not using the term itself, Craig Branham describes advocates as "people who have mostly made up their minds about a particular issue, and believe in their ideas strongly enough to work with like-minded people to change public policy". On the sort of information they are likely to provide, he says, "while advocacy groups are quick to find fault with "mainstream" sources, they will be less likely to critically evaluate information that suits their particular view of the world".
(From: http://www.slu.edu/departments/english/research/rcont3.html)
Gender analysis as defined by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs is advocacy research. Divorce Equity is an advocacy group. Submissions to Select Committees are forms of advocacy, as is political lobbying in general. Policy is not based solely, or even principally, on the results of impartial and unbiased research, if such even exists.
Any discussion on the actual outcomes which might be expected as a result of the application of gendered analysis and perspectives will be largely speculative. Nevertheless, some general effects are clear.
3.1 Misleading information, wrong opinions and expectations
The Evening Standard of 21 August 1998 carried an editorial on the legal implications of marriage. It refers to comments by Labour MP Dianne Yates that young women often do not understand the commitment they are making: "While Mrs Yates speaks on behalf of young women, and as her party’s women’s affairs spokesman she is entitled to concentrate on that area, the point applies equally to marriage hopefuls of all genders and ages." This highlights the danger of a gendered perspective. Universal problems can be presented as problems for one group only. If widely applied for one group only, that group might come to an unjustified belief that it is disadvantaged, while other groups might feel ignored. Issues might be incorrectly perceived, and policy changes and outcomes could also be slanted in favour of the identified group.
3.2 Inappropriate policies/laws
The development and implementation of policies are influenced by people’s perceptions. If perceptions are incorrect, then inappropriate policies will be developed and policies will be applied inappropriately.
When policies are made, their implementation does not occur automatically. There are mechanisms through which it occurs. Much of the regulation imposed by government involves the legal sector, for example. The efficiency of the legal system is discussed in Birks S and Buurman G (1997) Is the Legal System an Efficient Regulatory and Dispute Resolution Device? Issues Paper No. 1, Centre for Public Policy Evaluation, Massey University. Specific weaknesses which make the legal system vulnerable to incorrect perceptions are discussed in part 4 of Birks S (1998) Gender Analysis and the Women’s Access to Justice Project, Issues Paper No. 2, Centre for Public Policy Evaluation, Massey University. There are other areas where policies are applied, including the health and education sectors, in addition to social welfare.
Gender analysis can result in misinformation and incorrect perceptions, which then cause inappropriate decisions to be made. As every economist knows, however, people do not passively accept changes without altering their behaviour. Technically, if their plans are not realised, there is an incentive for them to modify their perceptions and their behaviour. If their perceptions of the future change, then they are likely to change their plans. The following section speculates on some possible outcomes arising in response to distortions caused by incorrect information and inappropriate policies due to taking a gendered perspective.
3.3 Effects as people modify behaviour
There are likely to be implications in all areas of life, but, given the examples used in section 2, this paper will concentrate on the effects with respect to marriage and parenting, both direct and indirect.
The direct effects on marriage are that there would be a shift giving greater material benefits to women on the breakup of a marriage, while there is no immediately forseeable reduction in the likelihood that they would retain custody of any children. This would result in more women choosing to end marriages. At the same time, men would be less willing to enter into marriage due to the higher potential price and greater risk. There is a danger that perceived inequities by both partners, and the emphasis on such inequities in public debate, would result in greater stress and conflict in relationships. Studies have indicated that this is harmful for children (Doherty W J, et al. (1998), Amato P R and Keith B (1991) "Parental Divorce and the Well-Being of Children: a Meta-Analysis", Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), pp.26-46).
Those who have been married once, being more aware of the situation, would be even less willing to remarry. With the extention of aspects of the Matrimonial Property Act to de facto relationships, there would be a similar reluctance by men to enter into such relationships.
There would be repercussions also for children in terms of the nature of their relationships with their parents and extended families. This would impact on their expectations of relationships in their adult lives. In July 1997 there were over 173,000 parents with current or outstanding child support liabilities (Code of Social and Family Responsibility, Fact Sheet 7). There are therefore at least that number of children who have spent part of their childhood with one parent absent from the home. Many of these will have experienced a situation where one parent has an obligation to pay, but no guardianship rights or effective parenting role. This is likely to impact on families of the future, as well as future birth rates.
Experience of less stable families also affects ability to and incentives to plan long term. Financial transfers due to property settlements and child support liabilities, with few guaranteed rights in return, will affect career plans and willingness to asccumulate assets. Less stable families are also said to have impacts on health, crime, teenage pregnancy and other social problems (see, for example, Nord C W and Zill N (1996) Non-Custodial Parents' Participation in Their Children's Lives: Evidence from the Survey of Income and Program Participation Volume II, US DHHS at: http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/fathers/SIPP/PT2.HTM).
There are potential broader implications also. As the misinformation becomes more apparent, credibility will be affected. In so far as information is accepted by some and rejected by others, there would be increased polarisation of views. There is a danger that politics will be shaped by conflict between women’s rights and men’s rights groups, which would be socially divisive in itself and wasteful through diverting attention away from some more appropriate perspectives.
While gender analysis may bring apparent gains to some groups in the short term, there are likely to be unintended and unanticipated outcomes which may bring serious costs in the long run.
Appendix I
WOMEN’S ACCESS TO JUSTICE PROJECT
TERMS OF REFERENCE
The Law Commission: Te Aka Matua te Ture will examine the response of the legal system to the experiences of women in New Zealand, recognising the importance of the Treaty of Waitangi in the examination of Maori women's experiences.
The Law Commission: Te Aka Matua te Ture will take account of the multi-cultural character of New Zealand society and New Zealand's obligations under international law.
Priority will be placed on examining the impact of laws, legal procedures and the delivery of legal services upon:
· violence against women, and
· the economic position of women.
At all stages of the project, there will be widespread consultation with women throughout New Zealand. The project will draw upon, and complement, the work of other government agencies, the Judicial Working Group on gender equity and other Law Commission projects.
The Law Commission: Te Aka Matua te Ture will report to the Minister of Justice concerning:
· specific law reforms, and
· educational and other strategies
which will promote the just treatment of women by the legal system.
Appendix II
Extracts from: The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
(my emphasis)
Article 5:
States Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, the members of the extended family or community as provided for by local custom, legal guardians or other persons legally responsible for the child, to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognised in the present Convention.
Article 7:
1. The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.
Article 9:
3. States Parties shall respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if it is contrary to the child's best interests
Article 18:
1. States Parties shall use their best efforts to ensure recognition of the principle that both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child. Parents or, as the case may be, legal guardians, have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern.
References
60 Minutes, TV1, TVNZ, broadcast on 5th January 1997
Amato P R and Keith B (1991) "Parental Divorce and the Well-Being of Children: a Meta-Analysis", Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), pp.26-46
Arnold T, (1998) "What’s Mine is Mine and What’s Yours is Mine" Law and Economics Association of New Zealand Newsletter, July, pp.1-4
Birks S. (1994) Women, Families and Unpaid Work, Discussion Paper No. 94.9, School of Applied and International Economics, Massey University
Birks S (1995) "Review of Women and Economics: a New Zealand Feminist Perspective, by Prue Hyman", New Zealand Economic Papers, Vol. 29(1), June, pp.103-110
Birks S and Buurman G (1997) Is the Legal System an Efficient Regulatory and Dispute Resolution Device? Issues Paper No. 1, Centre for Public Policy Evaluation, Massey University
Birks S (1998) Gender Analysis and the Women's Access to Justice Project, Issues Paper Number 2, Centre for Public Policy Evaluation, Massey University.
Branham C (http://www.slu.edu/departments/english/research/rcont3.html)
Bridge C, "Reallocation of Property after Marriage Breakdown", in Henaghan M and Atkin B (eds) (1992) Family Law Policy in New Zealand, OUP.
Department of Social Welfare (1997) Code of Social and Family Responsibility: Fact Sheet 7
Cowan C and Kinder M (1986) Smart Women, Foolish Choices, Bantam, pp.46-55
Department of Justice (1995) Criminal Justice Quarterly
Doherty W J, Kouneski E F and Erickson M F (1998) "Responsible Fathering: An Overview and Conceptual Framework", Journal of Marriage and the Family, May, 60, pp.277-292
Easting S K and Fleming R (1994) Families, Money and Policy, Intra Family Income Project, Wellington and Social Policy Research Centre, Massey University
Evening Standard 21 August 1998
Hyman P (1994) Women and Economics: a New Zealand Feminist Perspective, Bridget Williams
Kingma D R (1993) The Men We Never Knew: Women's Role in the Evolution of a Gender, Millenium
Kuhn R and Guidubaldi J (1997) "Child Custody Policies and Divorce Rates in the United States" (http://www.vix.com/crc/sp/spcrc97.htm)
Leibrich J, Paulin J and Ransom R (1995) Hitting Home - Men speak about abuse of women partners, Department of Justice
Massey University Massey Focus, 1996, Issue 1
Ministry of Women’s Affairs (1996) The Full Picture: Guidelines for Gender Analysis. (http://www.mwa.govt.nz/fullpicture/whtga.html)
Ministry of Women’s Affairs Annual Report 1996/97 (extract) (http://www.mwa.govt.nz/annual/1997/policy.html#Income)
Ministry of Women’s Affairs (1998) Status of Women in New Zealand 1998 (http://www.mwa.govt.nz/annual/cedaw/httoc.html)
New Zealand Parliamentary Debates, Vol.435 (Nov 6-Nov 27 1980), page 5432
Nord C W and Zill N (1996) Non-Custodial Parents' Participation in Their Children's Lives: Evidence from the Survey of Income and Program Participation Volume II, US DHHS (http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/fathers/SIPP/PT2.HTM)
Pool I (1998) "The Family Court in 2015: The Socio-Demographic Context", Proceedings of the New Zealand Law Society Family Law Conference, Christchurch, p.318
Report of the (United Nations) Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing, China, 4-15 September 1995 (gopher://gopher.undp.org/00/unconfs/women/off/a--20.en)
Robertson N, Busch R, Ave K and Balzer R (October 1991) The Hamilton Abuse Intervention Pilot Project: The First Three Months, Family Violence Prevention Co-ordinating Committee
Robinson J P and Bostrom A (1994) "The over-estimated workweek? What time diary measures suggest", Monthly Labor Review, 117 (8): 11-23
Schmittroth L (ed), (1991) Statistical Record of Women Worldwide, London: Gale Research
Snively S (1994) The New Zealand Economic Cost of Family Violence, Family Violence Unit, Department of Social Welfare
Statistics Canada (1993) A Portrait of Families in Canada
Statistics New Zealand and Ministry of Women’s Affairs (1997) Time Use Survey Update No.1, November
Waring M, 1988, Counting for Nothing: What Men Value and What Women are Worth, Allen and Unwin
Women’s Access to Justice Project (1995) Overview of Law Commission's project and issues arising in the consultation sessions to date, Law Commission
B v B 1997 NZFLR 217
Z v Z 1997 NZFLR 241