Under Representation Of Genders In Public Administration: Comparative Analysis Of India And Other Developing Countries

THIS ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN BY DIVYA ANAND, A STUDENT OF SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, PUNE

Keywords- India, women, gender equity, civil service, patriarchy, Non-Binary, Public Administration

Introduction

Administration is the execution of the executive functions of government, as opposed to the legislature and the judiciary. It is amongst the most important tools available to the government for achieving national goals. Public administration is the foundation of government and the primary means through which national policies and strategies are enforced. In an ideal world, various principles of equality, justice, transparency, equality, and non-discrimination guide the essence of public administration. The goal of such a governance model is to promote diversity and women’s empowerment in Public Administration.

To achieve equitable development in society gender equity in civil service is sine qua non. It is crucial that the structures of authority, decision-making and implementation should be modified to provide access and equity to all segments of society including women. But ironically, women inhabit only 20% of decision-making places in public and private realm.[1]

According to Ernst & Young’s Worldwide Index of Women as Public Sector Leaders around the G20 major economies, while women make up approximately 48 percent of the overall public sector workforce, they account for less than 20 percent of public sector leadership. When looking at individual Asian countries, the data is bleak. Women make up 42 percent of the public sector workforce in Japan, the world’s third-largest economy, but only 1.8 percent are leaders. Other Asian G-20 nations fare better, though they remain right at the bottom of the index of female public sector leaders: Indonesia has 16.4 percent; India has 14.8 percent; the People’s Republic of China has 9.1 percent; and the Republic of Korea has 4.8 percent. Beyond the G-20, female representation in the high ranking tiers of the public sector in Asia continues to remain atrocious, with female-to-male ratios ranging from.03 (Pakistan) to.9 (Japan) (Philippines). Existing UNDP study also suggests that females are under-represented, particularly in positions of leadership and decision-making. According to available data, women make up 45 percent of public administration on average, but there is wide variation in women’s participation across nations, ranging from 3 percent to 77 percent. The as a whole percentage of women in public administration is particularly high in OECD countries (55.1%) and lowest in Arab countries (35.9 percent ). However, when it comes to the average percentage of women in decision-making leadership roles in public administration, Latin America and also Caribbean have the highest average share (43.4 percent) and Africa has the lowest (25.1 percent ). Furthermore, only 20% of nations have achieved parity (50%) in the proportion of women in public administration decision-making leadership roles.[2]

Women in the Indian Administrative Service

Government services in India are categorized as All India Services, Central Services, and State Services. The very first competitive examination for the AISs – IAS and IPS – after independence was held in 1948. The male monopoly in IAS existed until 1950, and the first lady was admitted in 1951.[3] Despite the fact that India’s constitution guarantees equal treatment, the Indian Administrative Service Rules of 1954 were discriminatory and disadvantageous to women, as “no married women shall be assigned to the service and step down from the service in the event of marriage.” This disqualification and restriction were removed in 1972 by deleting the provision from the IAS recruitment rule, as well as married women have been allowed to enter the service, as well as an added provision for maternity leave.[4] Women made up only 12% of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and 6.4 percent of the Indian Police Service (IPS) in 2015. Furthermore, analysis unequivocally reveals that women are restricted primarily in sectors that promote prevalent social norms of their innate province of bear, rear, and nurture.[5] The proposed study looks into gender diversity in Indian civil services in general, and specifically in the AIS – IAS and IPS. According to the findings, women are under – represented in the IAS in general, and in managerial/executive positions in particular. Personal factors, organizational factors, and institutional and cultural factors, in particular, are suppressing their inclusion in these services. According to the 2011 census, females account for 48.5 percent of the total population of 1.2 billion. Even so, women account for only 25.5 percent of jobs in India. They hold only 20% of positions in the public sector. Their presence in the Indian government is dismal, with less than 15% of senior civil service positions held by women. Furthermore, they are in charge of only 15 divisions out of a total of 95.[6]

Research Objective

The purpose of this paper is to conduct a comparative analysis of the factors that contribute for the effective advancement of women in leadership roles in developing countries’ public administration, with a focus on India’s progress, and to examine factors that may hinder women from making further advancement. In this research, a cultural approach was taken, highlighting that the social contexts in which institutions operate contour how they behave and act.

Research questions

What are the factors impeding women’s advancement in public administration, despite constitutional and government initiatives? Are these factors common in developing countries?

What can be done to increase the fair and full female participation, including young women, in all levels of government? What can be done to ensure that sexual harassment and gender-based oppression are not tolerated in public administration?

Research Methodology

This research is based on doctrinal type pattern, which is divided into two different types such as the analytical and the descriptive method. This research for the paper is based on information which has been already been made available and then further analyzed those facts to prepare and present this research. Simply put, this research involves secondary data obtained mostly from books, and articles etc.

Literature review

Dr. Bulbul Dhar James, Women in Indian Public Administration: Prospects and Challenges (2020) – “Bureaucracy or civil services is the backbone of administration, a vehicle for development and a buffer-system for smooth political transformation in any country. In other words, these services act as central axis around gamut of governance. All the key functions of administration, e.g. policy formulation and implementation, maintenance of law and order and delivery of public goods and services, are performed by these services. Indian civil services are made up of All-India Services and Central Civil Services at union level and the state civil services at province level. Undeniably, the civil services have preformed commendable task since independence. Indeed, these services stirred the nation through every thick and think but well within broad contours and canons chalked out by the constitution.

At present approximately 6.4 million civil servants (Civil Service Survey, 2010) are engaged in the country. Out of which nearly half are working with the union government of India. In India nearly 5300 civil servants are appointed to serve one million people while this figure is 7100 civil servants per million inhabitants in UK (Cabinet Office, 2008). Pre-independence epoch was only male citadel. Women were hardly visible in public life but exception. Consequently, women have begun entering the civil service in all sectors of administration, although they are concentrated mostly in the lower level echelons of administration. According to Fifth Pay Commission (1996), women employees constitute 7.51 percent of the total government employees, but 98 percent of the women employees confined in groups C and D (that is, lower levels) of the official hierarchy.[7]”

The Gender Gap Index – assesses countries on how well they are dividing their resources and opportunities among their male and female populations, regardless of the overall levels of these resources and opportunities. By providing a comprehensible framework for assessing and comparing global gender gaps and by revealing those countries that are role models in dividing these resources equitably between women and men, serves as a catalyst for greater awareness as well as greater exchange between policymakers.

“Global Gender Gap Index (GGGI) published by the World Economic Forum in 2018 ranks 149 countries on their status of gender equality through various parameters. On this index, India ranked 108th on its performance on gender equality. In the Global Gender Gap Index 2020, the number of countries increased to 153 in which India’s ranking was 112th. India’s score has moved from 0.665 in 2018 to 0.668 in 2020. The report also said that the estimated earned income of women in India was one-fifth of men’s, which put India among the bottom 10 countries globally on that indicator. India is the third-worst performer in the region, after Afghanistan and Pakistan.[8]”

Kabir, S.L. Key Issues in Women’s Representation in Bureaucracy: Lessons from South Asia – “Analyzing the Civil Lists Published by the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India depicts that the women‟s entry in to IAS is not increasing much and has been fluctuating from time to time. This is corroborated by the random analysis of the data for few years from the Civil list shows that in the year 1951 only one woman got into the service, after ten years that is in the year 1961 also only one woman entered the service. In the last decade that is in the year 2000 only 9 women got into Indian Administrative Service. Moreover in between years also there is an increase and again there is a decrease in the number of women getting into the service and women‟s entry is not on the increase every year. In the contemporary period women IAS officers are not debarred from any kind of postings within the service. They are working in all the states and union territories and holding a variety of ranks from senior most to junior most level.”

Gaps in Research

• The study of public administration in India, as well as gender disparities in public administration, differs greatly from the Western approach. It is dependent on the interdependence of the various stakeholders in our democracy, so the research methods used should be contextual and legitimate rather than theoretical.
• The global gender index does not take other non-binary genders into account when assessing countries on significant issues such as employment, discrimination, crime, and so on, making it difficult for the third gender, despite being legally recognized in most countries, to obtain an identity, employment, and representation in policymaking leadership roles.
• Despite the many and varied constitutional and governmental initiatives there’s no actual monitoring of these guidelines or a recent report on how well have these policies or initiatives performed in the advancement and the progress of women and other non binary genders in the promised leadership posts.
• There is a dearth of scholars conducting active research on this topic, as well as a gap in comprehending gender stereotypes. The research processes are particularly dynamic and varied, but the researchers face a lack of institutional support, which stifles any advancement. Survey research methods are most appropriate when extraneous influences are avoided. More intensive research in this area is possible, which will broaden our insight.

Analysis

Male-dominated and patriarchal attitudes and practices continue to pervade public institutions, perpetuating harmful, and sometimes vicious, norms. Despite the fact that there is no global baseline on women’s involvement in Public administration, the Government of India has made it a top priority to eliminate gender inequities, reduce disparities between men and women, improve women’s socioeconomic status, and increase their participation in various fields. The following are some of the major initiatives undertaken by the Government of India-

Constitutional Provisions – Articles such as Article 14, Article 15 (3), Article 39A, and Article 42 make special provisions for rights of women to ensure gender equality.

Legislative Provisions – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961; Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostics Act (PCPNDT), 1994; Sexual Harassment of Women and Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013; Equal Remuneration Act, 1976; Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 (Amended in 2017) aimed at mandating women’s rights

Political Participation – Also, to bring women in the mainstream of political leadership at the grass root level, government has reserved 33% of the seats in Panchayati Raj Institutions for women. Capacity Building of Elected Women Representatives (EWRs) programme by Ministry of Women and Child is conducted with a view to empower women to participate effectively in the governance processes.[9]

 

Institutional Mechanisms – National and state councils will be created on a routine basis to monitor the Policy’s implementation. The Prime Minister will preside over the National Council, and the Chief Ministers will preside over the State Councils. Both will be extensive in composition, with representatives from relevant Departments/Ministries, State and National Commissions for Women, Social Welfare Boards, legislators of Non-Governmental Organizations, Women’s Organizations, Financial Sector, Trade Unions, finance companies, and scholars. These entities will analyze the Policy’s implementation progress twice annually.[10] The National Development Council will be notified of the advancement of the policy’s program from periodically for recommendation and remarks.

As a result, the law of the land drains out discriminatory practices and allows the opposite gender to enter the revered platform. In other words, the Indian Constitution guarantees equal opportunity in public employment. Gender discrimination is thus explicitly illegal and strictly prohibited in all walks of life. Even so, rule 5 (3) of the Indian Administrative Services Rules of 1954 empowered the government to request the dismissal of a female officer after marriage on the grounds of efficiency. The services rules were removed from the guide lines book in 1972 after women members of parliament and leaders raised a stink about them.[11] 

Marginalized gender identities in public administration

Trans, non-binary folks and women- There has been a significant increase in the proportion of female students and faculty in public administration, possibly as a result of an increase both in production and consumption for gender-related scholarship, or, put another way, as a consequence of an increase in women public administrators. Even so, many of the systems that still exist in the workplace were designed for people who do not get to be pregnant, do not require nursing rooms in the workplace, do not require maternity leave or midday hours to pick up children after school, and do not have aged care and child – care obligations.[12]

Aishwarya Rutuparna Pradhan (formerly Ratikanta Pradhan) is India’s first openly transgender civil servant, working in the Odisha Financial Services (OFS) as a commercial tax officer.

Representation in other developing countries-

Ghana – Ghana can be listed within Africa with weakest parity of 25.1 percent, Ghana as a Nation can be seen to be doing stronger than many Countries in the Region, even if the momentum is not as instant as we would have thought. At the very least, our Constitution guarantees equal access to leadership positions for men and women. Barriers faced in numerous studies have impacted gender parity in terms of women in leadership roles. They have been notable accomplishments over the years, but much more remains to be done.[13] Various stakeholders, including governments, non-governmental organizations, the media, and donor partners, have launched activities, programs, and projects to increase women’s participation in public and political senior roles. Again, Ghana is not immune to the global challenges that women face, such as gender-based violence against women.

Israel – In terms of female parliamentary representation, Israel seems to be almost there. A 30 percent female parliament is the UN criterion for accurate representation. The Israeli Knesset is made up of 27.3 percent women. While Israel clearly outperforms other nations in the region, as a democracy, it still has a long way to go in order of female representation in Israeli government. Only six women served in the Israeli cabinet between 1948 and 1992.[14] Opportunities for women in local government have been limited. Israel as a nation has a strong societal emphasis on the community and conventional family structure, which influences participation. In Israel, for example, the obstacles to participation in religious administration are often based on one’s religious status as well as on the basis of gender. Women are frequently excluded from public life due to the emphasis on the community and Jewish continuity. Furthermore, a historically hegemonic masculinity political agenda and a steadily declining proportion of women in public policy have created an environment in which women’s issues are overlooked and women’s grievances are not given the same priority as other concerns within the state. Women are also subjected to a high level of sexual harassment.[15]

Argentina – Argentina is regarded as one of Latin America’s most “progressive,” or as some refer to it, “European” countries. Argentina appears to be experiencing an expansion in the percentage of women’s participation in decision-making positions in government when it comes to gender equality on authoritative public positions in some very different institutions. Women hold 17.4 percent of cabinet posts in Argentina (4 out of 23 total positions), according to Womensats.org. Although the actual proportion of women in ministerial positions is lower than it should be, advancement has been achieved since Argentina’s history has had incredible women protagonists as political icons for the citizens of Argentina. Furthermore, as per the Females in Parliament Graph, Argentina is ranked 17th, with women constituting 37.4 % of the Lower House, or 96 out of 257 seats, and 38.9 % of the Upper House, or 28 out of 72 seats.[16]

Guatemala – Guatemala has a demographic of 15.8 million people, with women constituting more than half of that figure. As per Prensa Libre, a news publication in Guatemala, women make up 52% of political party members, 20% of national executive committee members, and only 12% of presidential or general secretary positions. According to that information, women are involved in the Guatemalan government, but they make up only a very small percentage of those in positions of leadership. The United Nations Women organization informs readers about a few aspects that aid in the reduction of women in leadership positions in Guatemala. Territorial, ethnic, and gender-related inequalities are some of the constraints that women face.[17] The Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy (NIMD) collaborates with three Guatemalan organizations: MOLOF, alas de mariposa, and Convergencia Civico-Poltica de Mujeres. These organizations are collaborating to achieve their common objective of producing Guatemala’s political system more reflective of Guatemalan society as a whole. By teaching women about human rights, laws, state administration, and how structures are created.[18]

Factors affecting Gender Equity in Public Administration

These are the numerous overt and nefarious factors that obstruct women’s exposure in public spaces in general, and in civil sector in particular. Personal factors, organizational factors, and institutional and cultural factors, in particular, are suppressing their inclusion in these services.

Personal Factors

• Because of differences in social and familial hierarchy, personal factors influence women’s behavior, perceptions, attitudes, and so on, particularly in relation to working life versus private life. Domestic roles such as childcare, family, and elder responsibilities are institutionalized and prioritized over career aspirations.
• The most significant barrier to women’s exposure in public spaces is a lack of education. Discrimination against women begins in primary school, and that there is a literacy gap between men and women.
• There are some of the adaptive and maladaptive glass-ceiling aspects that stymie women’s career advancement. Which include: male leadership behaviors, discourse, and language that exclude women; informal organizational cultures, also known as the old boys club; women’s unwillingness to self-promote their accomplishments and capabilities, seeking to make them institutionally invisible; and women who are well-qualified for professorships but are not chosen. Politicians and bureaucrats are both predisposed to patriarch ideology – “a man is preferred because he is a man.”
• Discriminatory hiring and promotion practices create barriers in institutions that do not have equal opportunity policies. In other words, a large part of the problem stems from the long-held belief that men are more natural leaders than women, which has been aggravated by the expanding use of typically male-led and male-dominated search committee/s for appointment. a scarcity of resources and a lack of property rights

Socio-Cultural Factors

Gender stereotypes and deep rooted gender roles have severely limited women’s participation in the public sphere.

• Traditional cultural beliefs and perceptions are significant impediments to gender equality. Strong and disparate gender-role values create barriers, oppress women, and obstruct the accomplishment of gender equality in Indian society.
• The double hardship of professional and personal commitments, as well as economic resource constraints, limit women’s opportunity to participate in public decision – making. Patriarchal social structures and a patriarchal culture in public life create an atmosphere that makes it difficult for women to be equal citizens in public decision-making.
• Women are still stereotyped as underlings who cannot engage in elections or hold senior decision-making leadership roles. In general, women lack critical resources (economic, political, and cultural) that are required when negotiating their entry into public institutions.

Institutional Factors

• Despite a strong gender equality perception represented in governmental gender equality initiatives and legal structures, there are still challenges.
• Discrimination has an impact on women’s ability to advance in their careers. Gender-specific gaps in national laws, such as the lack of a clear definition of gender-based discrimination, add to the difficulty of attempting to address gender discrimination, including in assigned and elected roles.
• Women face additional barriers to participation in public and political life as a result of decision-making processes and structures.
• Women are centered in traditionally female-dominated industries and at delegated levels. Women’s participation in decision-making procedures in areas such as economics, business sector and energy, mining, urban management, and transportation is further limited.

Conclusions and recommendations

Diversity, which includes fair access for women to leadership positions, is not only the moral thing to do, but it is also the most effective. According to a recent UNDP and McKinsey study, women inclusion in public administration and decision-making roles is favorably related to economic development and gender equality in society.[19] It also implies that participation and leadership by women fosters an environment conducive to better and more reliable government. International organizations, national women’s organizations, and equality and human rights commissions must extend the debate on women ’s participation into the public and private sectors (in addition to the political sphere) more consistently, as well as explicitly integrate women’s public and private sector governance into the principle of and strategies for women’s empowerment and agency. Furthermore, when women are in positions of leadership, such as chief executive officer (CEO), there is a greater likelihood of an increase in the number of women directors. This suggests that once women reach senior positions, the pipeline for future supply of female leaders may be expanded.

The study shows that the number of women getting into the services is not steadily on the increase in spite of the steps taken to promote women entrants to the services and it fluctuates from year to year.[20]

(i) Raising awareness and dispelling myths about the services.

(ii) Providing high-quality education and developing curricula for civil service exams

(iii) Free and affordable coaching and scholarships.

(iv) Provision of a national academy for mentoring female aspirants from across the country.

(v) Career counseling centres in colleges and other educational institutions

(vi) Reservations for disadvantaged women and non-binary genders as well

(v) Making working conditions suitable for women.

(vi) Bringing out changes in the mindset of parents and society, considering women inferior and pressing them to be family- oriented and not career – oriented

(v) Weeding out the undesirable social customs and obligations associated with the genders.

Bibliography

Books

• Kumar, Hajira (2005), Women’s Empowerment: Issues, Challenges and Strategies, A Source Book, Regency Publication, New Delhi.
• Sahay, S. (1998), Women and Empowerment: Approaches and Strategies, Discovery Publishing House, New Delhi.

 

Websites

• inflibnet.ac.in
• com
• ie
• org
• nic.in
• net
• org

[1] G K Prasad, “Bureaucracy in India: A sociological approach”, Sterling, New Delhi, 1974.

[2] World Bank (2011). World Development Report. Defining gender in the 21st century. Washington DC: World Bank

[3] Maheshwari, S. R. (2005). Public Administration in India: The Higher Civil Service. New Delhi: OUP.

[4] Kabir, S. L., & Jahan, M. (2007). Women’s representation in bureaucracy: a study on Bangladesh. Social Science Review, 24(2), 1–17

[5] Govt. of India. (1997). A Report of the Fifth Central Pay Commission (Vol. II).

[6] Ministry of Education and Social Welfare (1974). Towards Equality: The Report of the Committee on the Status of Women in India. New Delhi. Government of India

[7] Dhar James, D., 2020. Women in Indian Public Administration: Prospects and Challenges. <https://doi.org/10.5296/jpag.v9i3.10947>

[8] (Global Gender Gap Index, 2021)

[9] Pib.gov.in. 2021. Global Gender Gap Index. <https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1602397>

[10] Mishra, R. K. (2001). The national civil service system of India: A critical view. In J. P. Burns & B. Boworuwathana (Eds.), Civil service system in Asia (pp. 117–147). Northhampton: Edward Elgar Publishers.

[11] Swarup, H. L., & Sinha, N. (1991). Women in public administration in India. In J. H. Bayes (ed.), Women and public administration: International perspectives. NY: The Haworth Press

[12] Khan, M. M. (2000). Public administration. In M. Ahmed (Ed.), Bangladesh in the new millennium (pp. 61–79). Dhaka: Dhaka Community Development Library.

[13] Riccucci, Norma M.; Van Ryzin, Gregg G.; Lavena, Cecilia F. (2014). “Representative Bureaucracy in Policing: Does It Increase Perceived Legitimacy?”. J Public Adm Res Theory. 24 (3): 537–551

[14] Tayeb, M. H. (1988). Organizations and national culture: A comparative analysis. London: Sage.

[15] United Nations. (1989). World survey on the role of women in development. New York: United Nations.

[16] Stivers, C (1990). “Toward a feminist perspective in public administration theory”. Women & Politics. 10 (4): 49–65

[17] Park, Sanghee (2013). “Does Gender Matter? The Effect Of Gender Representation Of Public Bureaucracy On Governmental Performance”. American Review of Public Administration. 43 (2): 221–242

[18] United Nations Development Programme. (1995). Human development report. New York: Oxford University Press.

[19] Walby, S. (1990). Theorising Patriarchy. Oxford: Blackwell.

[20] Jamil, I. (1994). Administrative culture: A mode of understanding public administration across culture. Bergen: Los Center