Issue

Vol 39 No 1 (2024): January

Date Log

Submitted
Oct 26, 2022
Accepted
Apr 27, 2023
Published
Jan 18, 2024
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright

Upon acceptance of an article, authors transfer copyright to the JIEB as part of a journal publishing agreement, but authors still have the right to share their article for personal use, internal institutional use, and for any use permitted under the CC BY-SA license

Open Access

Articles are freely available to the public without any subscription with permitted reuse. For open access articles, permitted third party (re)use is defined by the following Creative Commons user licenses: Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-SA).

The Impact of Input Tariffs on Gender Inequality: An Empirical Study in Indonesia

https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.v39i1.5948
Noorish Heldini
nheldini@gmail.com
Research Center for Sustainable Production System and Life Cycle Assessment, National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Indonesia

Corresponding Author(s) : Noorish Heldini

nheldini@gmail.com

Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, Vol 39 No 1 (2024): January

Abstract

Introduction/Main Objectives: Discrimination between male and female workers occurs because of the difference in the “endowment” and social and cultural norms, especially in developing countries. This study aims to examine the impact of input tariffs on the ratio of female workers who are differentiated, based on technology-intensity and the labor-intensive sector and the non-labor-intensive sector. Background Problems: Trade openness contributes to technological change so companies reallocate resources more efficiently and reduce discrimi­nation. Previous studies have yielded ambiguous results regarding input tariffs and the ratio of female workers. Therefore this study attempts to estimate the impact of input tariffs on the ratio of female workers in Indonesia. Novelty: In contrast to the previous studies that did not include the lag-dependent variable, this study includes the lag variable female labor ratio as an exogenous variable in the estimation. Research Methods: Using FE-IV, panel data at the company level for the period from 2003 to 2015. Finding/Results: The estimation results show that trade openness can eliminate discrimination and increase the ratio of female workers. When firms are differentiated by their technology-intensity, the reduction in input tariffs leads to an increase in the ratio of female workers in medium and high technology-intensity firms, and non-labor-intensive firms, where the impact is the same between importing and non-importing firms. The estimation results show that trade openness can eliminate discrimination and increase the ratio of female workers entering the market. Conclusion: Trade openness can have both positive and negative impacts on Indonesian workers, especially female workers. To increase female labor participation, the Indonesian government needs to implement supporting policies, to improve equitable access to education for all citizens in Indonesia, needs to provide child-care facilities around office areas, flexibility in working hours for women, training and skills, and provide opportunities for women to occupy strategic positions.

Keywords

trade technology-intensity tariff labor demand
Heldini, N. (2024). The Impact of Input Tariffs on Gender Inequality: An Empirical Study in Indonesia. Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, 39(1), 57-72. https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.v39i1.5948
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Acemoglu, D., & Autor, D. (2011). Skills, tasks and technologies: Implications for employment and earnings. Handbook of Labor Economics. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169721811024105
  2. Akhtar, R. (2023). Economic growth, gender inequality, openness of trade, and female labour force participation: a nonlinear ARDL approach. Economic Change and Restructuring. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-023-09488-7
  3. Amiti, M., & Cameron, L. (2012). Trade liberalization and the wage skill premium: evidence from Indonesia. Journal of International Economics, 87(2), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2012.01.009
  4. Amiti, M., & Davis, D. R. (2011). Trade , firms , and wages: Theory and evidence. Review of Economic Studies, 79(August), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdr016
  5. Autor, D. (2003). Lecture note: the economics of discrimination-theory. Graduate Labor Economics I, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, 1-18.
  6. Azis, A. (2020, March). Gender, globalization and feminization of division of labour. In Proceedings of the 13th International Interdisciplinary Studies Seminar, IISS 2019, 30-31 October 2019, Malang, Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.9-3-2020.163839
  7. Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data (third).John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chicheste..
  8. Baltagi, B.H. (2008). Panel data econometric analysis (Vol. 4). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
  9. Banerjee, P., & Veeramani, C. (2015a). Trade liberalisation and women’s employment intensity: Analysis of India’s manufacturing industries. Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, June.
  10. Banerjee, P., & Veeramani, C. (2015b). Trade Liberalization and Women’s Employment Intensity: Analysis of India’s Manufacturing Industries, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research
  11. Central Bureau of Statistics. (2022) https://www.bps.go.id/indicator/6/1170/1/persentase-tenaga-kerja-formal-menurut-tipe-kelamin.html
  12. Charfeddine, L., & Mrabet, Z. (2015). Trade liberalization and relative employment: Further evidence from Tunisia. Eurasian Business Review, 5(1), 173–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-015-0020-6
  13. Figini, P., & Görg, H. (1999). Multinational companies and wage inequality in the host country: the case of Ireland. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 135(4), 594-612.
  14. Goldberg, P. K., & Pavcnik, N. (2007). Distributional effects of globalization in developing countries. Journal of Economic Literature, 45(1), 39–82. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.45.1.39
  15. Goldin, C. (1994). The U-shape female labor force function in economic development and economic history. NBER Working Paper Series, 1982, 323.https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w4707/w4707.pdf
  16. Gupta, A. (2021). Effect of trade liberalization on gender inequality: the case of India. IMF Economic Review (Vol. 69, Issue 4, pp. 682–720). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41308-021-00143-7
  17. Haseeb, M., Suryanto, T., Hartani, N. H., & Jermsittiparsert, K. (2020). Nexus between globalization, income inequality and human development in Indonesian economy: Evidence from application of partial and multiple wavelet coherence. Social Indicators Research, 147(3), 723-745.
  18. Heath, R., & Jayachandran, S. (2018). The causes and consequences of increased female education and labor force participation in developing countries. NBER Working Paper Series, 22766, 121.
  19. International Labor Organization (ILO). (2015). Labor and social trends in Indonesia 2014 2015. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/---ilo-jakarta/documents/publication/wcms_381565.pdf
  20. Jamielaa, M., & Kawabata, K. (2018). Trade openness and gender wage gap: evidence from Indonesia. Journal of International Cooperation Studies, 26(1), 25-40.
  21. Jamil, W. I., & Damayanti, A. (2018). Dampak penurunan tarif impor terhadap pengang¬guran di Indonesia: Analisis level regional. Jurnal Perencanaan Pemba-ngunan, II(3), 241–258. https://doi.org/10.36574/jpp.v2i3.49
  22. Juhn, C., Ujhelyi, G., & Carolina, V.-S. (2014). Men women and machines: how trade impacts gender inequality. NBER Working Paper Series, 01(01), 1689–1699. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w18106/w18106.pdf
  23. Kis-Katos, K., Janneke Pieters, & Robert Sparrow. (2018). Globalization and social change: gender-specific effects of trade liberalization in Indonesia. IMF Economic Review (Vol. 66, Issue 4, pp. 763–793). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41308-018-0065-5
  24. Lang, K., & Spitzer, A. K. L. (2020). Race discrimination: An economic perspective. Journal of Economic Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.34.2.68
  25. Law of the Republic Number 13 of 2003
  26. Mitra, R., & Hossain, M. S. (2018). Does trade openness increase income inequality in the United States. The Empirical Economics Letters, 17(10), 1185-1194.
  27. Mukhopadhyay, U. (2015). Economic liberali¬zation and gender inequality in the labor market: A theoretical approach. Review of Urban & Regional Development Studies, 27(1), 68-87.
  28. Ntuli, N., Jili, N. N., & Xaba, M. R. (2023). Women participation in leadership positions in Mtubatuba local municipality, South Africa. Journal of Leadership in Organi¬zations, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.22146/jlo.74881
  29. Oishi, Y. (2018). Importing inequality: trade liberalization, technology, and women's employment. GRIPS Discussion Papers 18-16, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies. https://ideas.repec.org/p/ngi/dpaper/18-16.html.
  30. Pieters, J. (2014). Trade liberalization and gender inequality. IZA World of Labor, October, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.15185/izawol.114
  31. Rodrik, D. (2018). New technologies, global value chains, and developing economies (No. w25164). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  32. Sauré, P. U., & Zoabi, H. (2011). When Stolper-Samuelson Does Not Apply: International Trade and Female Labor. Available at SSRN 1939962.
  33. Sehrawat, M., & Singh, S. K. (2019). Human capital and income inequality in India: Is there a non-linear and asymmetric relationship? Applied Economics, 51(39), 4325–4336. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1591605
  34. Stock, JH, and M. Yogo. 2005. Testing for weak instruments in linear IV regression. In Identification and Inference for Econometric Models: Essays in Honor of Thomas Rothenberg, ed. DWK Andrews and JH Stock, 80–108. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  35. Sulistyaningrum, E., & Michael Tjahjadi, A. (2022). Income Inequality in indonesia: which aspects cause the most? Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, 37(3), 229–253. https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.v37i3.2015
  36. Sun, S. Z. (2019). The effects of trade liberali¬zation on skill acquisition: A systematic review. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy (Vol. 18, Issue 2, pp. 74–95). https://doi.org/10.1108/JITLP-08-2018-0036
  37. Wardhani, D. K., & Supratiwi, W. (2023). Characteristics of a good board of directors for Indonesian SOEs performance. Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, 38(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.22146/jieb.v38i1.4410
  38. Wuestenenk, N., & Begall, K. (2022). The motherhood wage gap and trade-offs between family and work: A test of compensating wage differentials. Social Science Research, 106, 102726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2022.102726
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Download this PDF file
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 625 Download : 748