1.

INTRODUCTION
The United Nation Development Program (UNDP) brought people to the centre of
development by emphasizing human development as a process of enlarging peoples
choices. People are both agents and beneficiaries of change. This notion has totally
dethroned GNP maximization and reliance on per capita income as the only yardstick for
measuring development. Thus GNP maximization becomes a necessary but not sufficient
element for human development.
Human Development Index (HDI) - HDI was introduced in UNDP to measure human
development for 174 developed and developing countries. It focuses on 3 critical dimensions
to human development: longevity, knowledge and a decent standard of living. This index
is now widely used in the analysis of socioeconomic development. Although the use of
composite indexes has been criticized HDI does simplify a complex reality and offers
important policy insights.
Gender related Development index (GDI) - Women represent half or more of the population
of any given country. How do they fare in human development? In 1995 UNDP introduced a
second measure of human development that takes into account differences in achievements
between men and women.GDI comprises the same 3 HDI variables adjusted for gender
differences. In no country, industrial or developing, do women enjoy the same opportunities
as men.
According to World Bank, investing in woman is the most beneficial investment a developing
country can undertake. Gender equality is recognized as a highly desirable developmental
goal. In the developing world, woman lags behind men in every aspect of economic life.
Womens lower shares in education, labour force and income define their low status,
inflecting high opportunity costs on their economies in terms of forgone growth and
development.
The report constructed a gender- related development index for 130 countries which has
spurred efforts to construct a similar index for Indian states[Prabhu et al,1995;Shiva Kumar
1996]these attempts, however, must be considered preliminary in view of the several
problems associated with (a)the GDI as a measure of gender disparities and (b)its calculation.
Inequality between man and woman can be of various kinds. As far as economic aspects are
considered, biases in life expectancy, education, jurisdiction and professional life are among
the suspect that might deserve closer investigation. However, in every general, it seems
necessary to clarify that inequality in itself does not necessarily need to be something to be
considered as negative. Nonetheless, it may not be forgotten that gender inequality itself can
well be considered bad and required political counteraction, regardless of the existence of a
link with economic growth.

Page 1

1.1. Background of study

The UNDPs Human Development Report for 1995 focused on gender disparities in
development. Education is an important component of opportunities and empowerment. A
number of empirical studies find that increases in womens education boost their wages and
that returns to education for women are frequently larger than the returns to education for
men. Empirical evidence also shows that increases in female education improve human
development outcomes such as child survival, health and schooling; the impacts on these
outcomes are larger for a given increase in womens education than for an equal increase in
mens education (World Bank 2001, Schultz 2002, Strauss and Thomas 1995, King and Hill,
1993).
Over the last several decades, gender issues have attained increased prominence in the
debates over development policy. There is a growing body of evidence and experience
linking gender awareness in policy and projects to equitable, efficient and sustainable
outcomes in development. However, these links are still not widely understood nor have these
lessons been fully integrated by donors or national policy makers.
Day by day each and every nation is growing. Some of them are growing very fast and some
are not. With this growing factor the inequality between man and woman is also changing.
This change can be indicated by an indicator, known as Gender Development Index (GDI).
The Gender Development Index (GDI) is a composite indicator that measures the
development of states according to the standard of living in a country. Although standard of
living mainly reflected by high level of per capita income, but whether the link works
strongly or not is a question of debate.

Page 2

1.2. Objectives
Over the last decade the functional relationship between income and gender development has
become one of the most debated issues in policy making areas and in the social sciences.
International agencies such as the International Labour Organization (ILO), the United
Nations (UN) and the World Bank are attempting to better understand the growth impact on
alternative gender development strategies. A crucial concern of this effort is to gain proper
knowledge about economic growth impact on gender inequalities.
1) In this paper we focus on the link between a countrys degree of gender disparity in
different dimension and its income level. Gender development gap may have adverse
impacts on a number of valuable development goals.
2) This paper envisages analyzing the validity of existing literatures on gender equality
and the objective is to establish a casual relationship between the income component
of the index to the gender related development and how far income level of the
country can influence the existing gender gap of the country.

2. SURVEY OF LITERATURE
1) It is a fair generalization to say that the relative status of women is poor in the
developing world, compared to developed countries. We treat gender inequality as an
endogenous variable and show that it can be explained to a considerable extent by
religious preference, regional factors, and civil freedom. For some of these variables,
the direction of the effect depends on the particular measure of inequality (POLICY
RESEARCH REPORT ON GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT, David Dollar, Roberta Gatti,
1999).

2) The opportunity cost of women's time as well as the bargaining power of women to be
important determinants of the fertility rate. Greater female education, and particularly
lower gender inequality in education, is thus likely to lead to reduced fertility.
(POLICY RESEARCH REPORT ON GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT, Stephan Klasen,
1999)

3) From the regressions applied in this paper, the hypothesis that a high per capita
income is associated with less gender inequality can be supported Similar to Dollar &
Gatti, it was found that inequality in education is strongly and negatively associated
with high GNP per capita. However, the factor of inequality in education did not turn
out to be the most influential one when predicting per-capita income levels (The
Influence of Gender Inequality on Economic Growth, David Gumbel, 2004).

4) The effect on growth of increased gender equality of opportunity has received far
more attention than either equality of voice or equality under the law. Equality of
opportunity in education has received particular attention, for two simple reasons.
Page 3

First, educationand, more broadly human capitalis easily incorporated into two
frequently-used econometric models of economic growth: the augmented Solow
model and endogenous growth models.28 Second, educational inequalities are both
easily measurable and these measures are widely available (Gender Equality, Poverty
and Economic Growth, BY: Andrew Morrison, Dhushyanth Raju, Nistha Sinha, The World
Bank Gender and Development Group Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network
September 2007)

5) Closing the gap between male and female employment rates would boost GDP
significantly. Were Italian female employment to rise to the level of male
employment, then the level of GDP (assuming everything else equal) would be
boosted by 21%. For Spain, GDP would be 19% higher, Japan 16%, the Eurozone
13%, Germany 9%, France 9%, the US 9%, the UK 8%, Denmark 5% and Sweden
3% (Gender Inequality, Growth and Global ageing, Kevin Daly, 2007).
6) In recent years gender has become a significant part of the mainstream discourse on
economic growth and development. Gender perspective has been adopted by the
international organisations such as, World Bank, WTO and IMF in the formulation of
Millennium Development Goals, trade policies and macroeconomic structural
Programmes (GENDER INEQUALITY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND
GLOBALIZATION: A STATE LEVEL ANALYSIS OF INDIA, Rashmi Umesh Arora, 2012)

3. SECTION
To measure Gender Development Index we need to understand the computation of HDI. We
have to collect the basic knowledge about the relationship between HDI and GDI. Gender
related HDI is known as GDI. In other words the GDI is the HDI discounted for gender
inequality. Gender-related Development Index (GDI), is not only measure the achievement in
the same basic capabilities as the HDI does, but takes note of inequality in achievement
between men and women. In early days HDI was the main ingredient to measure the income
proportion of the economy but it was not clear concept of gender biasness with respect to
their income. To measure gender wise contribution of the economy economist introduced a
new component called GDI.

3.1. METHODOLOGY
Page 4

In Gender related development Index we have to calculate three major component i.e. life
expectancy, educational attainment, and income. These three component are separately
calculated and then combined in an equal-sensitive way.
The value of is the size of the penalty for gender inequality. The larger the value, the more heavily a
society is penalized for having inequalities. If = 0, gender inequality is not penalized (in this case the
GDI would have the same value as the HDI). As increases towards infinity, more and more weight is
given to the lesser achieving group. The value 2 is used in calculating the GDI. This value places a
moderate penalty on gender inequality in achievement. When = 0, the above formula becomes the
arithmetic mean weighted by female and male populations shares, and the resulting index should be
equal to the component index for the whole population as used in HDI. When, as in the calculations
for the GDI, = 2, the above formula becomes the harmonic mean weighted by the population shares
(UNDP 1995: 73)1. Any difference between the female index and the male index regardless of its
direction is penalized in the ED Index. This is to say that for all three components the Equally
Distributed formula can only impose a penalty, not award a bonus.

We assume , as the parameter of inequality aversion, which is equal to 2. Let N be the total
population. NM is the total number of male and NF is the total number of female in the whole
population.
Equally distributed Life Expectancy index:
[{(NM/N)LEIM}^(1-)+{(NF/N)LEIF}^(1-)]^1/(1-)=A (say)
LEIM = Life Expectancy Index of male
LEIF= Life Expectancy of female
Equally distributed Educational Attainment Index:
[{(NM/N)EAIM}^(1-)+{(NF/N)EAIF}^(1-)]^1/(1-)=B (say)
EAIM=Educational Attainment Index of male
EAIF= Educational Attainment Index of female
Equally distributed proportional income
[{(NM/N)PYM}^(1-)+{(NF/N)PYF}^(1-)]^1/(1-)=K (say)
PYM=Proportional Income of male
PYF= Proportional Income of female

real GDP
pertocapita
forn),gender
A Adjusted
harmonic mean
is equal
n/(1/x 1 (discounted
+ 1/x2 ++ 1/x
where ninequality):
is the number of terms.
K x Average Real GDP per capita= $K
Page 5

Equality distributed Income Index:

($K-$100)/($5448-$100)=C
$100 is the minimum value and $5448 is the maximum value of adjusted real GDP.
Gender-Related Development Index (GDI):
(A+B+C)/3
GDI is the average of Equally Distributed Life Expectancy Index, Equally Distributed
Educational Attainment Index and Equally Distributed Income Index.

3.2. DATA ANALYSIS

Major finding
Transition of position in terms of HUMAN and GENDER RELATED INDEX
Diagram 1: Position of countries with respect to their Income Index and HDI in the year
1980

Source: UNDP Report 2014

i)

In the beginning of 20th century, India was standing in relatively lower position in
comparison with China & Kenya, Kenya has a higher value of income index and
HDI than other two. From 1980 to 1990 we get a better picture of India where
both income index and HDI values increases but still India is lagging behind the
other two, but distances have narrowed down.

Diagram 2: Position of countries with respect to their Income Index and HDI in the year
1990
Page 6

Source: UNDP Report 2014

ii)

iii)

Interestingly, another feature can be found by analyzing the above diagrams that
initially countries all over the world are scattered in a more arbitrary way. But
after one decade the scatterness among the countries has been reduced to a larger
extent that signifies that countries are started to converge in terms of HDI.
In the year 2000, it can be seen from the diagram below that India has progressed
in account of HDI and surpassed Kenya. Kenya is almost in a static position and
its value of income index is almost stagnant since 1980s while China registered a
significant improvement in HDI.

Diagram 3: Position of countries with respect to their Income Index and HDI in the year
2000

Page 7

Source: UNDP Report 2014

iv)

In 2010, India and China both improved in HDI as well as in terms of income
index but China moves faster in the race of human development than India which
translated into higher gap between India and China position. 0ne point should be
noted that Kenya has shown a marginal increment in the value of HDI, but income
index remains more or less same. That means Kenya is lagging behind than other
two due to less improvement in income sphere.

Diagram 4: Position of countries with respect to their Income Index and HDI in the year
2010

Source: UNDP Report 2014

Diagram 5: Position of countries with respect to their Income Index and HDI in the year
2013
Page 8

Source: UNDP Report 2014

v)

vi)

vii)

From the early years, it can be viewed that countries are coming closer to each
other i.e. the arbitrariness of the scatter plot has been reduced significantly.
Positive concern for human development all over the world is depicting in this
above diagrams. Almost every country has shown positive change in terms of
human development.
Another natural causal relationship is evident from the diagrams that increase in
per capita income of a country i.e. rise in income index and increase in HDI value
of that country has a clear positive relation.
In the recent year, India has improved its position but Chinas progress towards
human development is praiseworthy whereas Kenya is far lagged behind than
other two due to almost stagnant income index. In spite of the fact that in the
beginning Kenya was the 1st rank holder among these three countries.

After discussing about human development, a decent picture of improvement can be found.
Now, lets shift the focus towards gender development. Does income play such significant
role in GDI as in HDI? Does human development necessarily translated into gender
development? The answer is not that satisfactory

Diagram 6: Position of countries with respect to their income Index and GDI in the year
2013

Page 9

Source: UNDP Report 2014

viii)

In the above diagram, it is evident that countries all over the world have extreme
difference in terms of gender development. Arbitrariness in scatter plot is quite
high than that of initial state of HDI calculation. Here, Kenya having much lesser
value of income index has done well in GDI compared to India. China is in winwin state both in terms of HDI & GDI. Some countries with high value of income
index have higher value of GDI. Although it cannot be generalized that income
index and GDI share a direct relationship as in the case of HDI.
So now I want to investigate whether there lies any positive relation between a
countrys level of national income and its value of GDI. The diagram below
depicts relationship between GNI per capita in PPP (Constant 2011 International
$) .i.e. Aggregate income of an economy generated by its production and its
ownership of factors of production, less the incomes paid for the use of factors of
production owned by the rest of the world, converted to international dollars using
PPP rates, divided by midyear population.

Diagram 7: Position of countries with respect to their GNI per capita and GDI in the
year 2013

Page 10

Source: UNDP Report 2014

ix)

Above figure shows no such direct relation between level of NI and GDI value
as in the case of HDI that conclude the very fact that higher per capita do not
reflect in GDI value . There must be some added efforts instead of growth that
would implicate better gender development. Moreover, India has to go a long way
to achieve high GDI value; in spite of having a decent growth rate its performance
towards gender development is not satisfactory at all.

Diagram8: Position of countries with respect to their GNI per capita and HDI in the
year 2013

Source: UNDP Report 2014

Here, relation between level of national income and HDI value have been plotted for the
purpose of comparison. Figure shows vivid difference in relation. In case of HDI countries
are close or to each other showing a clear positive relation.

Page 11

From the above discussion it is clear that high level of GNI trigger better performance In
HDI, but high value income index do not necessarily translate into better performance in GDI
because bad performance in other two indices other than income index may discount the good
effect of income index alone, as a result no direct relation between GDI and income level is
found. In this sphere we need policy prescription for supplementing income growth that
would be more viable in future towards the progress of development in our country. Although
many steps are taken in this context, but recent data reveals that much has to be done in
future.
After analysing the global scenario the paper focus on Gender Inequality and the level of
development of the countries. I have chosen China as a representative of developed countries
and Kenya as a representative of under developed counterpart of the world. Now India has
been taken to compare with these two countries to access the position of India with others.
Being a developing country India has surpassed the takeoff stage of growth. Now this growth
how influenced the level of Human Development as well as Gender Development that need
to be addressed.
Table 1: Human Development Index (HDI) Trends, 1980-2013
YEAR

CHINA

INDIA

KENYA

1980

0.423

0.369

0.446

1990

0.502

0.431

0.471

2000

0.591

0.483

0.455

2005

0.645

0.527

0.479

2008

0.682

0.554

0.508

2010

0.701

0.570

0.522

2011

0.710

0.581

0.527

2012

0.715

0.583

0.531

2013

0.719

0.586

0.535

SOURCE: UNDP Report 2014

According to UNDP report 2014 on the basis of these HDI trends all countries are ranked.
China is ranked 91, India is ranked 135 and Kenya is ranked 147.
From the development studies we know there are some ranges of HDI which helps us to
make some groups among the countries of the world with respect to their estimated HDI. The
countries whose estimated HDI is greater than 0.8 (HDI>0.799) belongs to very high HDI
group. The countries whose HDI is in between 0.699 to 0.799 (0.799-0.699) belongs to high
HDI group and countries whose HDI is in between 0.699 to 0.549 (0.699-0.549) belongs to
Page 12

medium HDI group and lastly HDI value less than 0.549 are belongs to low GDI group. From
the above table we can observe till 2000 China was belong to medium HDI group but after
that it took off its situation and came into the high HDI group. Now in case of India till 2000
it was belong to lowest HDI group but there after it developed itself and became medium
HDI group. Lastly about Kenya till 2005 it was in lowest HDI group but after the year it took
off its HDI position.
Diagram 9: Human Development Index (HDI) Trends

After analysing the growth rate of these three countries, now the trend of HDI can be
analysed. Three countries have done much better since 1980 to the current period. India was
the lowest among these three during 1980 but achieved 2 nd rank in 2013. It means India has
developed much faster than Kenya. Kenyas HDI value almost stagnated at around 0.5. china
is obviously done a great job in the course of human development. It has been shown in the
figure that China has followed upward rising trend in HDI value and ranked 1 st among these
three with a high value of HDI around 0.7 in the year 2013.

Table 2: GDP growth rate, 1991-2013

Page 13

YEAR
CHINA
1991
3.84
1992
9.18
1993
14.24
1994
13.96
1995
13.08
1996
10.92
1997
10.01
1998
9.30
1999
7.83
2000
7.62
2001
8.30
2002
9.08
2003
10.03
2004
10.09
2005
11.31
2006
11.60
2007
13.00
2008
9.60
2009
9.20
2010
10.40
2011
9.20
2012
7.70
2013
7.70
SOURCE: Compile from multiple sources

INDIA
1.06
5.48
4.75
6.66
7.57
7.55
4.05
6.18
8.85
3.84
4.82
4.30
8.30
7.92
8.40
9.70
9.00
6.20
6.80
10.10
6.80
3.20
3.20

KENYA
1.44
-0.80
0.35
2.63
4.41
4.15
0.47
3.29
2.31
0.60
1.00
1.10
1.50
5.10
5.80
6.40
7.00
1.60
2.60
5.80
4.40
4.60
5.10

CIA- The world fact book

European commission statistics
Table 3: Average rate of growth (1991-2003)
average growth rate

CHINA
9.877826087

INDIA
6.292609

KENYA
3.080435

Interestingly if we want to compare these countries in terms of their average rate of growth
between 1991-2013.The relative ranking positions of these countries is exactly identical with
their ranking position in terms of HDI. The result also provides an important insight that
income growth contributes much to hold relatively better position in HDI ranking among the
countries of the world.
Diagram10: GDP growth rate, 1991-2013

Page 14

From the above graph diagram we see that India and Kenya share almost the same growth
rate in the year 1991 where as China is better off with around 4% of GDP growth rate. After
that Kenya and India has an almost similar trend of growth rates till 2010. Although India is
doing better that Kenya, While China has experienced high growth rate of 14% in the year
1993 followed by decrease in growth rate till 2000. After that China recovers herself and
follows moderate growth rate at around 10% on an average. In the year 2010, India and China
experience a slump till 2012. In the current year China has the highest growth rate around 8%
followed by Kenya around 5% and India around 3%.

Table 4: Comparison between Human Development Index (HDI) and Gender

development index (GDI)
Country
HDI Rank
China
91
India
135
Kenya
147
SOURCE: UNDP Report 2014

GDI Rank
49
132
107

From the above table we can see the position of these three countries according to their
ranking with respect to HDI & GDI in the basis of world rank. Here is an interesting situation
can be observed i.e. India is above Kenya according to HDI rank but in case of GDI Kenya is
better than India. At the same time China is better in the both cases.
After talking about the cross country study, the paper wants to address the global scenario
regarding the relationship of income level and HDI, GDI ranking among the countries i.e.
whether higher level of income really play a vital role for attaining higher value in HDI &
GDI or not. For this purpose Karl Pearsons Correlation index has been constructed. For that
Page 15

data has been collected for countries are about their Gross National Product (GNI) per capita
at PPP$(2011) and HDI, GDI values. The following table shows the value of correlation
between HDI, GDI index and GNI per capita income. These figures vividly represent the
significant differential effect of income on HDI and GDI values which is earlier proved in
cross country comparison. The findings are suggesting that a country with higher per capita
income is more likely to hold a better position in HDI ranking but in case of GDI the chance
of that particular country to hold a higher index value is relatively lower as the value of
correlation is quite low. The outcome is very useful in case of policy implication.
Table 5: Correlation
Karl Pearson's correlation index

GNI P.C.I
HDI
GDI

0.725
0.449

In this table a glance of job segregation is provided.

Table 6: Gender segregation in field of study: In most countries, women dominate health
and education studies and men dominate engineering and sciences.

Field of study

Fraction of countries where

the field of study is

Number of
countries

Female
dominated %

Number
countries

Male dominated Neutral %

%

of

Agriculture
3
74
22
89
Education
84
6
10
97
Engineering,
0
100
0
97
manufacturing
and
construction
Health
and 82
4
13
97
welfare
Arts
and 55
6
39
96
humanities
Science
13
68
20
96
Services
21
59
21
87
Social sciences; 23
16
61
97
business
and
law
SOURCE: WDR 2012 team estimates based on data from UNESCO Institute for statiscs.

Diagram 11: Gender segregation

Page 16

Although this paper is primarily meant to search the differential impact of income component
on HDI and GDI. But as this difference is already shown and it is also backed up by
statistical measure in the above sections, some possible reasons for this underlying difference
are cited:
In GDI the method used to estimate female and male earned incomes ignores the
existence of self-employment; biases in women and mens access to full-time paid
work; and the complex nature of intrahousehold distribution of money, goods, and
labour. (Stanton 2007) which is not posses any problem in case of HDI as per capita
income of the countries is quite accessible.
A general critique of GDIs data availability and reliability has been provided by
Bardhan and Klasen (1999).The data used by the UNDP to estimate gender-specific
incomes are not in fact available for many countries. HDR 2005 (UNDP 2005: 346)
This types of criticisms are not provided for HDI. As a result this could be a possible
explanation for the differential impact of income.
Unlike the other components in GDI, gendered income is a rough estimate. Several
critiques have questioned the appropriateness of using non-agricultural wages
together with labour force participation as gender weights for GDP per capita.2
All these reasons reflect the same idea that unlike HDI in the case of GDI income component
does not serve as an appropriate measure to take into account women and mens standard of
living. As a result income component is having lesser command over GDI as in case of HDI.
Bardhan and Klasen (1999, 2000)
4.
Conclusion

From the above analysis, we can conclude that although the countries have progressed in
terms of human development till they need to go long in the way of gender development. As
we find that income sensitivity of GDI is lower than that of HDI. So income growth alone
cannot play a significant role to improve the situation of existing gender disparity.
Page 17

Moreover, from the last figure we can easily remark that women are skewed in some
economic activities and their proportion in comparison to male counterpart is negligible
mainly in case of engineering and manufacturing. Thus there are segregation of work i.e.
some are womens job and mens job.
When we compare the three countries which is India, China and Kenya an interesting point to
be noted that Kenya and India both started from a similar level of development but Kenya in
recent times lagged behind the other two. China has secured praise worthy position both
in context of HDI and GDI.
Whereas India is the least performing country among there three in terms GDI. So it is a
matter of grave concern that India should emphasised on human participation in economic
activity and empowerment so as to move forward in the path of gender development. China
can be a good example to follow. India has taken some steps to reduce the gender gap. The
calculation of correlation index and large difference in their values statistically established
the fact that income component has greater contribution towards HDI than GDI. Higher level
of per capita income leads a country towards higher rank in HDI with much larger probability
than that of in case of GDI.
Therefore here arises crucial need of policy prescription to promote gender parity and
development.

4.1. Policy Prescription

The Human Development Index (HDI) introduced by UNDP in 1990 is a simple average of
three dimension indices that measure average achievements in a country with regard to A
long and healthy life. But Gender gaps are pervasive in all walks of economic life. The goals
of human development cannot be achieved without the development and empowerment of
women. However, the reality that woman faces disparities in access to and control over
resources. Thus there is need to include gender sensitive measures of human development.
Therefore, in 1995, the UNDP introduced a Gender-related Development Index (GDI). The
Gender-related Development Index adjusts the average achievements in the same three
dimensions that are captured in the HDI, to account for the inequalities between men and
women. The construction of index is not enough to create proper environment for gender
development unless some policies are framed by the central authorities of the countries.
The paper finding reveals that a nation does not have to be affluent to treat women and men
equally. Thus promoting more women to leadership roles and creating environments more
conducive to womens input makes good sense from the perspective of business, politics and
ethics. Many nation are following some important guidelines (such as MDG) 3 to narrow down
the gender gap. An OECD country focuses on how to close these gender gaps under four
broad headings: 1) Gender equality, social norms and public policies; and gender equality in
Page 18

2) education; 3) employment and 4) entrepreneurship. In USA some positive action has been
taken in the same line by raising child care support, minimum wage, breaking occupational
segregation etc.
India also started to walk in the path of gender equality but the efforts are not creating good
results rather the gap is widening and all the indicators have been deteriorating over a period
of time [Swarna S. Vepa(2007)]. Thus gender discrimination continues to be an enormous
problem within Indian society. Women receive little schooling, strong "son preference" and
suffer from unfair and biased inheritance and divorce laws. These laws prevent women from
accumulating substantial financial assets, making it difficult for women to establish their own
security and autonomy.
To reduce the existing gender gap by 2015 as an objective of MDG, the task force has
identified seven strategic policies to be followed by nations of the world.
1. Strengthen opportunities for post-primary education for girls while simultaneously
meeting commitments to universal primary education.
2. Guarantee sexual and reproductive health and rights.
3. Invest in infrastructure to reduce womens and girls time burdens.
4. Guarantee womens and girls property and inheritance rights.
5. Eliminate gender inequality in employment by decreasing womens reliance on
informal employment, closing gender gaps in earnings, and reducing occupational
segregation.
6. Increase womens share of seats in national parliaments and local governmental
bodies.
7. Combat violence against girls and women.
These guidelines need to translate into development policy and practice at the scale required
to bring about fundamental transformation in the distribution of power, opportunity, and
outcomes for both women and men. The policy recommendations made in the above can pave
the way toward an equal world.

The Millennium Development Goals are a UN initiative. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are eight
international development goals that were established following the Millennium Summit of the United Nations in
2000

4.2. Limitation

The paper mainly indicated towards the fact that income level or its growth has differential
treatment on HDI and GDI. The states of relationships are presented by the value of
correlation index. Many researches [Dollar, Gatti et al,] have pointed out that growth and
Page 19

HDI has close and significant relation by applying regression analysis. Although the paper
has not applied regression but the relationship is also evident from correlation index.
The paper only concentrated on single component of HDI and GDI. But other factors like
education have also a lot of say in determining HDI and GDI which is not checked in this
paper. The role of other determinants of development is not stated properly.
Moreover in case of cross country comparison the countries have been chosen a bit arbitrarily
for the sake of convenience and for fulfilling the objective of the paper.
In spite of having afforded said limitations; the paper searched out the impact income
component on HDI and GDI and its preferential effect on each index which is the ultimate
objective of this paper. The limitations can be avoided in future.

5. REFERENCES:
1) A critical analysis of World Bank policy prescription of Gender mainstreaming. 28
June 2008.

Page 20

Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies at the University of British Columbia,
Vancouver,
Canada
2) A.P.Thirlwall, Economics of development 9th edition, page- 52.
3) Andrew Morrison, Dhushyanth raju, Nistha Sinha, The World Bank Gender and
Development Group Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network
September 2007, Gender Equality, Poverty and Economic Growth.
4) D. Hosni, M.Sandberg and A. Chanmala, Inequality among women and its impact on
economic growth: The case of MENA.

5) David dollar, Roberta gatti, 1999, page 20, Policy research report on gender and
development.
6) David Gumbel, 2004 The Influence of Gender Inequality on Economic Growth.
7) Kevin Daly, 2007 , Gender Inequality, Growth and Global Ageing.
8) Michael P. Todaro , Stethen C. Smith, Economic development 10 th edition, page- 4950 .
9) N.G.DAS, combined Edition (volume I & II), Statistical Methods, page- 304-308.
10)
Nancy Forsythe, Roberto Patricio Korzeniewicz, Nomaan Majid, Gwyndolyn
weathers, Valeria Durrant,2003,Gender inequalities and economic growth and economic
reform: A preliminary longitudinal evalution

11)
Rashmi Umesh Arora, 2012 , Gender inequality, economic development, and
globalization: a state level analysis of India,
12)
Stephan Kalsen, 1999, page 9 Policy research report on gender and
development.
13)
Swarna S.Vapa, 2007, Gender Equality and Human Development.
14) World Development report 2012 on Gender equality and Development
15) hdr.undp.org/ TIME: 11:45a.m DATE: 22.12.2014
16) mecometer.com/ TIME: 8:30p.m DATE: 8.1.2015
17)Engendering Human Development:
A Critique of the UNDPs Gender-Related
Development Index

Elizabeth A. Stanton
March 2007
POLITICAL ECONOMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

6. APPENDIX
List of tables
1) Human Development Index (HDI) Trends, 1980-2013
2) GDP growth rate
3) Average rate of growth (1991-2003)

Page No.
12
14
14
Page 21

4) Comparison between Human Development Index (HDI)

and Gender development index (GDI)
5) Correlation
6) Gender segregation

List of diagrams
1) Position of countries with respect to
their Income index and HDI in the year 1980
2) Position of countries with respect to
their Income Index and HDI in the year 1990
3) Position of countries with respect to
their Income index and HDI in the year 2000
4) Position of countries with respect to
their Income Index and HDI in the year 2010
5) Position of countries with respect to
their Income Index and HDI in the year 2013
6) Position of countries with respect to
their Income Index and GDI in the year 2013
7) Position of countries with respect to
their GNI per capita and GDI in the year 2013
8) Position of countries with respect to
their GNI per capita and HDI in the year 2013
9) Human Development Index (HDI) Trends
10) GDP growth rate,1991-2013
11) Gender segregation

15
16
16

Page No.
6
7
8
8
9
10
11
11
13
15
17

Page 22

Page 23