Achyuta A., A.V. Chari and S. Siddharth, 2013 “Firing Costs and Flexibility: Evidence from Firms’ Employment Responses to Shocks in India,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 95(3), pp. 725–740.
Agenor, P. and O. Canuto, 2013, “Access to Infrastructure and Women’s Time Allocation: Evidence and a Framework for Policy Analysis”, Fondation Pour Les Etudes et Recherches Sur Le Developpement Internationale, Working Paper 45.
Agenor, P., 2015, “Gender Equality and Economic Growth: An Overlapping Generations Model for India,” OECD Working Paper, forthcoming.
Bhalla, S. and R. Kaur, 2011, “Labour Force Participation of Women in India: Some Facts, Some Queries”, LSE Asia Research Center Working Paper No. 40.
Census of India, 2011, Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India
Cuberes, D. and M. Teignier, 2012, “Gender Gaps in the Labor Market and Aggregate Productivity,” Sheffield Economic Research Paper SERP 2012017.
Cuberes, D. and M. Teignier, 2014, “Gender Inequality and Economic Growth: A Critical Review,” Journal of International Development, Vol. 26, pp. 260–276.
Dougherty, S., 2009, “Labour Regulation and Employment Dynamics at the State Level in India,” Review of Market Integration, Vol. 1(3), pp. 295–337.
Eckstein, Z. and K. Wolpin, 1989, “The Specification and Estimation of Dynamic Stochastic Discrete Choice Models: A Survey,” Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 24(4), pp. 562–598.
Esteve-Volart, B., 2004, “Gender Discrimination and Growth: Theory and Evidence from India,” STICERD - Development Economics Papers 42, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, London School of Economics.
Gaddis, I., and S. Klasen (2014), “Economic Development, Structural Change, and Women’s Labor Force Participation: A reexamination of the feminization U Hypothesis,” Journal of Population Economics, Vol. 27, pp. 639–681.
Ghani, E., W. Kerr, and S. O’Connell, 2013, “Promoting Women’s Economic Participation in India,” Economic Premise No. 107, World Bank: Washington.
Goldin, C., 1995, “The U-Shaped Female Labor Force Function in Economic Development and Economic History,” in T. Paul Schultz, ed., Investment in Women’s Human Capital and Economic Development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 61–90.
Gonzalez, C., S. Jain-Chandra, K. Kochhar, and M. Newiak, 2015, “Fair Play: More Equal Laws Boost Female Labor Force Participation”, IMF Staff Discussion Note, Washington: International Monetary Fund.
Government of India, 2014, “Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme: Report to the People”, Ministry of Rural Development, New Delhi: Government of India.
Gupta, P., R. Hasan, and U. Kumar, 2009, “Big Reforms but Small Payoffs: Explaining the Weak Record of Growth in Indian Manufacturing,” India Policy Forum, Vol. 5, pp. 59–123.
Heckman, J. and T. MaCurdy, 1980, “A Life Cycle Model of Female Labor Supply,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 47 (1), pp. 47–74.
International Monetary Fund, 2013, “Women, Work, and the Economy: Macroeconomic Gains from Gender Equity,” IMF Staff Discussion Note 13/10, September 2013.
International Monetary Fund, 2015a, India: 2015 Article IV Consultation Staff Report, IMF Country Report No. 15/61, Washington: International Monetary Fund.
International Monetary Fund, 2015b, India: Selected Issues, IMF Country Report No. 15/62, Washington: International Monetary Fund.
Jaumotte, F., 2003, “Labor Force Participation of Women. Empirical Evidence on the Role of Policy and Other Determinants in OECD Countries,” OECD Economic Study No. 37, Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Khera R. and N. Nayak, 2009, “Women Workers and Perceptions of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act” Economic & Political Weekly Vol. XLIV No 43, October.
Klasen, S. and J. Pieters, 2012, “Push or Pull? Drivers of Female Labor Force Participation During India’s Economic Boom,” IZA Discussion Papers 6395, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
Klasen, S. and F. Lamanna, 2008, “The Impact of Gender Inequality in Education and Employment on Economic Growth in Developing Countries: Updates and Extensions,” Ibero America Institute for Econ. Research (IAI) Discussion Papers 175, Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research.
- Search Google Scholar
- Export Citation
)| false Klasen, S.and F. Lamanna, 2008, “ The Impact of Gender Inequality in Education and Employment on Economic Growth in Developing Countries: Updates and Extensions,” Ibero America Institute for Econ. Research (IAI) Discussion Papers 175, Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research.
Kochhar, K., U. Kumar, R. Rajan, A. Subramanian, and I. Tokatlidis, 2006, India’s Pattern of Development: What Happened? What Follows?”, Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 53(5), pp. 981–1019.
Mammen, K. and C. Paxson, 2000, “Women’s Work and Economic Development,” The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 141–164.
Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, 2014, NSS Report No. 557: “Informal Sector and Conditions of Employment in India,” Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India, July.
OECD, 2014, Economic Survey of India, Chapter 2, “Raising the economic participation of women in India – a new growth engine?”, November.
Planning Commission, 1970, Report of the Expert Group on Unemployment Estimate (Dantwala Committee), Planning Commission, Government of India.
We would like to thank Paul Cashin for invaluable guidance and support, as well as Ran Bi, Muneesh Kapur, Lisa Kolovich, Peter Lindner, Rakesh Mohan, Monique Newiak, Janak Raj, Janet Stotsky, and seminar participants at the Indian Ministry of Finance (December 2014) for helpful comments.
Informal sector workers are defined typically as working in unincorporated enterprises, which are usually small. The informal and formal sectors are alternatively referred to as unorganized and organized sectors in the Indian literature and in the remainder of this paper. Labor force and employment statistics in India are derived from surveys which do not clearly distinguish between participation in the formal and informal sectors.
The 28 states and 4 Union Territories of India analyzed here are: Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Pradesh refers to the undivided state comprising the present states of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana), Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Delhi, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Puducherry, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, West Bengal. These comprise 99.9 percent of India’s 2011/12 measured population of 1.21 billion persons.
The demographic-dividend refers to the potential benefits to a country from an increase in the working-age population relative to the number of dependents, with the latter defined as those aged less than 15 years or over 65 years old. The falling fertility rate in India will result in an increase in the working-age population share in India, as well as in its share of the population, through the next 35 years or so.
The income effect is the change of hours of work of an individual with respect to a change in family income. The own-substitution effect is the change in hours of work of an individual with respect to a change in their wage, holding income constant.
The Act came into force in February 2006 and was implemented in a phased manner across the country. In Phase I it was introduced in 200 of the most backward districts in the country. It was implemented in an additional 130 districts in Phase II during 2007-2008. The Act was notified in the remaining rural districts of the country from April 1, 2008 in Phase III. All rural districts in India are now covered under MGNREGA.
An unorganized enterprise is defined by Ghani et al. (2012) as a manufacturing business with fewer than ten employees and uses electricity. If it does not use electricity, the threshold is 20. The unorganized sector accounts for 90 percent of manufacturing establishments in India.
Labor force participation rates based on usual principal status are presented throughout the paper, unless otherwise specified. See Ministry of Statistics (2014) for additional details on the NSSO’s employment surveys.
The Report of the Committee of Experts on Unemployment Estimates submitted to the Planning Commission in 1970 states that “In our complex economy, the character of the labor force, employment and unemployment, is too heterogeneous to justify aggregation into single-dimensional magnitudes”.
The analysis uses monthly per capita consumption as a proxy for household income.
The 21 states covered are: Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Pradesh refers to the undivided state comprising the present states of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana), Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Delhi, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and West Bengal.
Chapter V-B of the Act requires firms employing 100 or more workers to obtain government permission for layoffs, retrenchments and closures (as of 1984).
This includes: proprietary; partnership; government/public sector; public/private limited company; co-operative societies/trust/other non-profit institutions; employer’s households (i.e., private households employing maid servant, watchman, cook, etc.) and others.