The mission of the WORLD Policy Analysis Center (WORLD) is to strengthen equal rights and opportunities globally by providing civil society, policymakers, citizens, and other researchers with tools to advance feasible and effective policy approaches for improving the well-being of individuals, families, communities, and societies. WORLD captures quantitatively comparative data for 193 United Nations (UN) countries on adult labor and working conditions, discrimination at work, child marriage, aging, education, constitutional rights, health, disability, family, migration, child labor, environment, and income policies. WORLD works with our partners to promote evidence-based decision-making across these areas. This page provides an overview of our approach to constructing the gender equality database and variables used in Equality within Our Lifetimes. More detailed variable descriptions are available on individual maps and with data downloads.
Our Approach to Building Comparative Measures
When determining what types of laws, rights, and policies to include in our databases, we prioritize policies that meet one or more of the following criteria: 1) there is widespread global consensus on their value; 2) research evidence supports their importance to human development, health, or well-being in a variety of geographic, social, and economic circumstances; or 3) input from civil society, policymakers, and other stakeholders indicates there are urgent questions about policy design that comparative data could help address.
Data Sources
In selecting data sources to analyze, our first priority is to identify sources containing full-text original legislation. To ensure the greatest level of accuracy and comparability across countries, we always aim to read the original laws (primary sources) rather than secondary summaries or policy descriptions. Primary sources allow for more accurate coding across countries, particularly in complex legal areas. Working with primary sources also allows us to provide excerpts or links to actual legislation and constitutions for those interested in passing new laws or creating reform in their countries. We review documents in their original language or in a translation into one of the UN’s official languages.
Secondary sources are used when information is unclear or insufficient for particular countries. In choosing these secondary sources, we prioritize those that are comparable across multiple countries, such as global or regional sources. When using information sources that cover a limited number of countries, we aim to ensure that the information they contain can be made consistent with other sources.
Our goal is to understand the scope of policy provisions and whether they extend protections to all, including, for example, workers in the informal economy, racial and ethnic minorities, urban and rural residents, and those in the poorest households. Accordingly, we code for policies in place at a national level with wide coverage. When policies are legislated subnationally (that is, when states or cities provide protections without a national guarantee), we code for the minimum guaranteed level of protection covering all states so as to not overstate safeguards available only in limited localities.
Coding Frameworks
In this work, coding refers to the process of translating legislative, policy, or constitutional text into a set of features that can be be quantitatively analyzed to provide readily understandable summaries of policy approaches across countries and transformed into data visualizations, such as maps or charts. For example, a researcher reviews many pieces of labor and social security legislation and uses them to answer questions such as: Does a country guarantee paid parental leave? Is it available to all parents, only mothers, or only fathers? How long is paid leave? What is the wage replacement rate? How long do workers need to have been employed to access paid leave?
To answer these questions consistently across countries, we first identify the essential policy features that we want to capture, including intrinsic characteristics, such as coverage; important elements identified in policy research; and minimum standards recognized in global agreements, where they exist. Researchers then read legislative text from 20 to 30 countries to develop an understanding of the approaches countries take in each of these areas. A coding framework consisting of questions and close-ended responses is developed to capture the essential policy features systematically across countries based on the range of approaches identified. Research team members then test whether this coding framework accurately captures approaches on an additional ten to twenty nations.
Once we have a viable framework, we seek feedback from civil society and researchers working in these areas to ensure the questions we are asking will provide the critical answers needed to inform policy debates. Their feedback can lead to more scoping and test coding to determine which questions are feasible to answer with available legislation, recognizing that some important areas aren’t always covered by national laws and policies. For example, access to sanitation facilities and safe transportation matters deeply to girls’ ability to complete their education but is rarely addressed in a meaningful way in national-level education laws and policies. In other cases, new areas of research might involve going beyond the initial legislation we planned to code, expanding the scale of the project.
Capturing the richness and variety of approaches taken by different countries is our priority throughout the coding process. Sometimes, after our research team analyzes sixty to eighty countries that fit within our coding framework, we discover a country whose policy does not accurately fit within our existing coding framework. In these cases, we revise the coding framework to incorporate the new policy features and then review all previously coded nations to ensure that all countries are consistently coded within the expanded framework.
Coding Process
Core to ensuring transparency and consistency is developing a codebook that details the rules and examples for coding each question. Researchers rely on this codebook to make decisions on coding policy features. The codebook is designed to be as straightforward as possible, but some questions require judgment calls. To minimize human error, we use a double coding system where two researchers independently code legal text for each country and then meet to compare their results. When two researchers cannot reach consensus based on the existing codebook, they bring these questions to the full coding team and senior analysts. This team meets regularly to discuss any questions or concerns that arise through the coding process. We record detailed minutes of these meetings and update the codebook to reflect any determinations that impact the coding rules.
Ensuring Rigor and Accuracy
Upon completion of coding, we conduct systematic quality checks. We also carry out targeted checks of countries that appear as outliers globally or for their region or income level.
For each of our databases, we use the most up-to-date sources available. While this approach is designed to achieve accuracy, it is important to note that when publicly available sources have not been fully updated, the most recent amendments may not be captured in our databases. Further, our process of coding legislation inevitably involves important matters of interpretation. For all databases, we welcome receiving feedback and copies of laws from anyone who believes the databases may not be fully up-to-date.
Data Developed for this Book
The comparative law and policy data developed for this book span six broad areas: discrimination at work, sexual harassment, enforcement mechanisms, care for children, care across the life course, and education.
Prohibitions of Discrimination at Work
Defining Areas of Work
To measure protections against private employer discrimination, we examined legislation across six areas: hiring, pay, advancement, termination, training, and harassment. We chose to look separately at each distinct area given the significant evidence demonstrating that women face discrimination at every stage of employment and that discrimination at every stage contributes to gender gaps in the economy. We separately analyzed whether prohibitions of discrimination included indirect discrimination; this expanded protection provides important safeguards against practices that have disparate impacts on women regardless of discriminatory intent.
Defining Types of Protection
We categorized the levels of protection against sex discrimination in each aspect of work as follows:
- Specific prohibition of sex discrimination: A country was coded as specifically prohibiting sex discrimination in a particular aspect of work if it either: 1) explicitly addressed discrimination against women in that aspect of work (“gender discrimination in hiring is prohibited”); or 2) broadly prohibited discrimination against women at work (“there shall be no distinctions between men and women at work”) and guaranteed equality in the specific area (“no one shall be discriminated against in hiring decisions”).
- Broad prohibition of sex discrimination: Countries that broadly prohibited discrimination against women but did not address specific aspects of work were coded as providing a “broad prohibition of discrimination against women.”
- General prohibition of discrimination: Countries that did not explicitly address sex but banned discrimination in an aspect of work for all workers were coded as providing a general prohibition.
- No explicit prohibition: Countries were coded as having “no explicit prohibition” if legislation did not take any of the approaches above.
We used the same methodology to evaluate protections against discrimination on other grounds, such as race and religion. We chose to look at the specificity of guarantees because evidence from case law suggests that courts may not interpret vague discrimination laws as protective against discrimination for all groups and all stages of employment. In addition, specifically for equal pay, we distinguished between countries that guarantee “equal pay for equal work” and those that guarantee “equal pay for work of equal value,” since the latter can offer stronger protection against pay gaps created by occupational segregation.
Protections Against Multiple Discrimination
To measure whether countries prohibit multiple discrimination against women at work, we examined whether legislation prohibited discrimination at work broadly or across any of the specific areas (hiring, pay, advancement, termination, training, and harassment) based on both sex and each of the following characteristics: race/ethnicity, migration status, religion, disability, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, and gender identity. In some countries, legislation explicitly prohibited discrimination against racial minority women but did not address race more broadly. We included these provisions in our mapping of multiple discrimination. We also captured specific references to intersectional discrimination.
Defining Social Groups
We captured protections against discrimination based on 14 different statuses. Because terminology used to describe protected groups varies across countries and across legislation, we coded protections based on a range of terms:
- Gender is coded based on references to “gender” or “sex” or specific protections for “female” or “women” employees.
- Marital status encompasses references to women’s marital status and, more broadly, to employees’ marital status, including gender-neutral terms such as “civil status,” “married,” “relationship status,” and “personal status.”
- Pregnancy includes “pregnancy,” “pregnant workers,” or “expectant mothers.”
- Maternal status covers references to “maternity” or gender-neutral references such as “parenthood,” “having children,” and workers with “family responsibilities.”
- Paternal status includes references to “paternity” or gender-neutral references.
- Race or ethnicity includes references to “color,” “clan,” “ethnic origin,” “indigenous,” “aboriginal,” “tribe,” or “ethnic groups.”
- Religion includes protections based on “creed,” “religious belief,” “religious opinion,” “religious adherence,” or “confession.”
- Sexual orientation includes references to “sexual preference” and “homosexuality.”
- Gender identity covers references to “gender expression,” “gender reassignment,” “transgenderism,” or “Hijra/Kothi.”
- Age includes broad references to age and specific non-discrimination protections for minors, the elderly, or individuals above a certain age.
- Migrant status includes “internal migrants,” “foreign migrant workers,” “immigrant status,” and “economic migrants.”
- Foreign national origin includes “ancestry,” “citizenship or origin of parents,” “country or place of birth,” “homeland,” “national descent,” or “national origin.”
- Social class covers “caste,” “social background,” “economic standing,” “economic status,” “social condition,” “social origin,” “socioeconomic status,” or “disadvantaged.”
- Disability includes references to general disability (“handicap,” “impaired,” or “special needs”) or to specific mental or physical disabilities.
Exceptions and Positive Action
Beyond looking at the scope and specificity of protections against discrimination, we also examined any additional legislative provisions likely to augment or undermine antidiscrimination laws’ impacts on equality in practice. Specifically, we captured: 1) whether legal loopholes exempted small businesses, charities or non-profits, or religious organizations from discrimination laws, in effect excluding significant numbers of workers from protections; and 2) whether legislation allowed for “positive action” to promote gender equality at work and address lengthy histories of discrimination and inequality either by mandating affirmative measures or by specifying that such measures are not considered discriminatory.
Prohibitions of Sexual Harassment at Work
To understand whether prohibitions of sexual harassment addressed the full range of damaging practices, we examined not only the types of conduct prohibited but also whether these laws covered workers regardless of job position or gender. To that end, we analyzed:
- The types of behavior prohibited by provisions banning sex-based and sexual harassment;
- Whether laws explicitly prohibited the sexual harassment of all workers or only full-time employees;
- Whether provisions covered sexual harassment based on sexual orientation or gender identity;
- Whether the law applied to workers regardless of gender or only covered harassment of women; and
- The extent to which laws explicitly prohibited harassment not just by employers and supervisors but also by peers and third parties in the workplace.
In some countries, sexual harassment at work is addressed in both criminal and labor laws. When multiple pieces of legislation explicitly addressed sexual harassment at work or by someone in a position of authority, we coded for the most protective provision.
Prevention of Sex Discrimination and Harassment and Response to Violations
In addition to the scope of coverage of discrimination and harassment laws, we also examined laws aimed at preventing discrimination and sexual harassment before it occurs and ensuring women can access justice if it does.
Employer Prevention
We examined legislation to determine whether employers were required to take measures to prevent gender discrimination or sexual harassment in the workplace. We distinguished between legislation that made it a general responsibility for employers and legislation that outlined specific steps, such as laws that required employers to create a code of conduct, establish disciplinary procedures, raise awareness, or provide legal information or mandated training.
Retaliation
Retaliation by employers against those who complain of sexual harassment and other forms of discrimination embodies ongoing discrimination and impedes all efforts to enforce antidiscrimination law. We assessed whether legislation explicitly prohibited retaliation for sexual harassment or gender discrimination complaints. Because retaliation can take a wide range of forms—from outright termination to denials of promotion—we examined whether individuals who reported gender discrimination or sexual harassment were protected from any adverse action, or whether the law more narrowly prohibited disciplinary action or retaliatory dismissals. Further, because women who come forward often have a better chance of succeeding on their claims if co-workers corroborate their accounts, we assessed whether prohibitions of retaliation covered not only individuals who filed a complaint or initiated litigation but also whether they clearly covered other workers who participated in investigations by providing evidence or testimony.
Legal aid
When antidiscrimination prohibitions are enforced through litigation, access to legal aid plays an essential role in ensuring laws effectively protect all, regardless of income. To understand approaches to reducing barriers to justice for low-income women, we measured whether countries guaranteed access to free legal counsel in civil cases. We captured the types of cases eligible for legal aid as well as its availability during different proceedings to ensure access from the beginning through completion of the legal process.
Alternative Dispute Resolution
When committed to enforcing non-discrimination, independent bodies charged with dispute resolution can provide an effective alternative to litigation. Thus, we also examined the availability and scope of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services provided through public independent bodies, including labor commissions, labor inspectorates, and human rights or equal opportunity commissions. Specifically, we examined whether these bodies undertake investigations in response to individual complaints and how they settle disputes, distinguishing among legally binding arbitration, administrative hearings, mediation or counseling, and referrals to courts of law.
We assessed whether individuals could file complaints with independent bodies to address three areas central to gender equality at work: gender discrimination, sexual harassment, and paid parental leave. In countries where paid parental leave is provided by social security instead of employers, we also examined whether wrongful termination claims for the use of paid leave could be brought to an independent body.
We also examined whether independent bodies could impose penalties, including fines, sanctions, or disciplinary measures, on a company or individual perpetrator following a finding of discrimination or harassment. We likewise examined whether legislation empowered independent bodies to provide remedies, distinguishing between measures that only narrowly allowed for re-employment and those that enabled individuals to receive monetary compensation, such as back pay or damages.
Prevention by Independent Bodies
Even when legal aid is available, the need to litigate for equal treatment places high human costs on victims of discrimination. Moreover, while it may, when effective and successful, lead to remedies for individuals involved, it does not always result in broader change. As a result, we examined the preventive role of independent bodies.
We examined whether legislation provided independent bodies authority beyond dispute resolution that could incentivize employers to eliminate discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace. First, we assessed whether legislation gave independent bodies legal responsibility for initiating gender equality investigations in individual workplaces. We did not include laws that make labor inspectorates broadly responsible for labor legislation compliance checks without explicitly mentioning gender equality.
Second, we assessed whether legislation made independent bodies specifically responsible for education, awareness, and advocacy for gender equality at work. To understand the scope of these commitments, we examined whether they broadly required these bodies to provide education or information to the public or to assist both employers and employees with legal advice or assistance. We classified countries as legislating a “narrow responsibility for workplace gender equality advocacy” if independent bodies provided assistance to only employers or only employees. We also classified countries as taking a “narrow” approach if their legislation only required these bodies to provide education on a subset of women’s rights at work.
Third, because laws that address discrimination more effectively can improve outcomes for far more women than a positive ruling in any one case, we examined whether legislation outlined a role for independent bodies in assessing the likely impacts on gender equality of proposed legislation or in identifying gaps in existing legislation and proposing new legislation, policies, or regulations to advance workplace gender equality.
Caring for Children
Identifying and Classifying Paid Leave
To understand the extent to which paid parental leave policies advance gender equality at home and at work, we examined whether employed mothers and fathers had access to paid leave surrounding the birth or adoption of a child and whether paid leave policies included incentives for greater gender equality in caregiving. We defined paid leave as a period during which the employee receives some pay regardless of the amount, type (a percentage of earnings, a flat amount, or a combination of both), source (employer or government) and timing (periodic or as a lump sum) of disbursements.
To understand whether mothers who return to work have adequate support to continue breastfeeding for at least one year as recommended by the World Health Organization, we examined the availability of paid breastfeeding breaks, including the combined duration of paid leave and breastfeeding breaks in countries that guarantee breaks for a set period of time after return to work. For example, if mothers in a specific country are entitled to 3 months of post-birth paid maternity leave and 4 months of breastfeeding breaks once they return to work (7 months total), we code that country as entitling mothers to breastfeeding breaks until their children are in the category of 6-11.9 months old.
Our analysis of paid leave for children’s health needs included both leave designated specifically for this purpose and other types of leave that could be used to meet these needs, such as emergency leave, family needs leave, discretionary leave, or casual leave. Leave specifically for children’s health needs included leave provided by employers and social security-provided benefits. We separately identified leave reserved for serious health needs and leave reserved specifically to care for or meet the health needs of children with disabilities.
Assessing the Generosity of Leave
The generosity of paid leave has implications for gender equality at home and at work: adequate leave time for both parents matters to the division of household labor and women’s ability to return to work, while an adequate wage replacement rate can make a critical difference for men’s take-up rates.
To measure generosity, we captured: 1) the total duration of paid leave in weeks, using standardized measures to convert leave defined in years, months, calendar days, working days, or days to weeks; and 2) the wage replacement rate of paid leave based on the percentage of wages guaranteed to parents on leave. In some countries, wage replacement rates varied based on the duration of leave, a worker’s tenure or contributions to a social security system, or other factors. To account for this, we separately coded the minimum and maximum wage replacement rates. Finally, a small number of countries do not base payment on a worker’s wages but instead guarantee workers a flat rate payment or a percentage of unemployment benefits. We separately categorized these approaches.
Job Protection
Because paid leave without job protection offers valuable income support but minimal security, we assessed whether countries prohibited dismissal during paid leave or guaranteed workers the right to return to their position after taking paid leave.
Coverage for All Workers
Some groups of workers may not be covered by labor or social security legislation; ensuring that all parents have access to leave is critical to realizing the greatest impact on gender equality and household wellbeing. To assess the scope of coverage, we analyzed whether legislation explicitly extended paid parental leave to groups that are often not covered including self-employed workers, domestic workers, home-based workers, and agricultural workers. We also examined whether workers needed to meet minimum tenure or contribution requirements to qualify for paid leave.
Coverage for All Families
To examine the extent to which paid parental leave is available to all families, we analyzed leave availability and length of leave in the case of adoption as well as childbirth; any specific provisions that provided additional leave to single parents alongside individual leave entitlements; and the use of gendered legislative language that limited same-sex families’ access to leave. To assess the extent to which paid leave for children’s health needs was available to all families and supported gender equality in leave-taking, we examined whether leave was an individual or family entitlement and whether explicit provisions provided single parents with additional leave alongside individual entitlements.
Caring for Adult Family Members Across the Life Course
Identifying Leave
Our analysis of paid leave for adult family members’ health needs included both leave designated specifically for that purpose and other types of leave that could be used to meet these needs, including emergency leave, family needs leave, discretionary leave, or casual leave. Leave specifically for adult family members’ health needs included leave provided by employers and social security-provided benefits. Some leaves are designated for particular conditions or situations, including imminent death, specific illnesses, hospitalization, chronic illnesses, or serious health needs.
Family Members Covered
In many countries, legislation only guarantees leave to care for certain family members. We separately assessed whether paid leave policies cover leave to care for spouses, elderly parents, adult children, grandparents, partners, siblings, or parents-in-law, using the terms in Table 1. We distinguished between provisions that required family members to live in the same household and those that did not. We considered all family members to be covered when legislation did not explicitly limit leave availability based on type of relationship.
Table 1: Codable Terms for Family Members
|
Family Member
|
Codable terms
|
|
Spouse
|
Spouse
Relative
Relatives to the first or second degree
Family member
Immediate family
|
|
Elderly parent
|
Mother
Father
Blood Relative
Relative
Ascendants
Predecessors
Relatives to first or second degree
Family member
Immediate family
|
|
Grandparent
|
Grandparent
Blood Relative
Ascendants
Predecessors
Relatives to Second Degree
|
|
Adult Child
|
Blood relative
Relative
Descendants
Relatives to first or second degree
Family member
Immediate family
Adult children
|
|
Partner
|
Partner
|
|
Sibling
|
Sister
Brother
Blood relative
Relatives to first or second degree
Immediate family
|
|
Parent-in-law
|
Mother-in-law
Father-in-law
|
Duration of Leave
We examined whether leave durations were sufficient to meet family members’ serious health needs. Bearing in mind that some serious illnesses can require six months or more for treatment and recovery, we categorized the duration of leave available as “less than 2 weeks,” “2 – 5.9 weeks,” “6 – 25.9 weeks,” and “26 or more weeks or until hospital discharge or recovery.” When legislation specified leave in days, months, or years, we used standardized measures to convert to weeks. When multiple forms of leave were available, such as leave for serious illness and payments to provide end of life care, we captured the longest form of leave available.
Wage Replacement Rates
We categorized the wage replacement rate of paid leave based on the percentage of wages guaranteed to caregivers on leave. In some countries, wage replacement rates vary based on the type of leave taken (end of life or more general leave), a worker’s tenure or contributions to a social security system, or other factors. To account for this, we separately coded the minimum and maximum wage replacement rates. Finally, a small number of countries do not base payment on a worker’s wages but instead guarantee workers a flat rate payment or a percentage of unemployment benefits. We separately categorized these approaches.
Education
Tuition-free and Compulsory Education
Given the significant gender gaps that persist at different levels of education, we examined whether countries guaranteed tuition-free and compulsory education through three different stages: completion of primary school, beginning of secondary school, and completion of secondary school. To make these measures comparable across countries, when countries specified that a child’s education would be tuition-free or compulsory beginning at a certain age, we identified the year of schooling that would correspond to if the child entered school at the standard starting age and did not repeat a level. We then translated school grades into primary, beginning of secondary, and completion of secondary for each country. A small number of countries had longer primary school periods separated into lower and upper primary. For comparability, when countries had eight or more years of primary school split into lower and upper levels, the upper level of primary was treated as the start of secondary education.
To assess guarantees at each level of education, we first examined whether legislation or national constitutions explicitly made education tuition-free or compulsory. If we identified no guarantee, we next examined whether education policies issued by government education departments or others made education tuition-free or compulsory. We did not include national plans that had not been implemented. We separately captured when constitutions or legislation made tuition-free or compulsory education subject to progressive realization or guaranteed its implementation within a certain time period.
Prohibitions of Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, and Sexual Violence in Education
We assessed whether legislation explicitly prohibited gender discrimination, sexual harassment, and sexual violence in education. Because the vast majority of countries do not distinguish these provisions by level of education, we do not present separate results for different levels.
For discrimination, we first examined if any laws broadly prohibited gender discrimination in education. If not, we examined whether countries more narrowly prohibited gender discrimination in admissions, guaranteed that boys and girls have equal access to education, made education explicitly compulsory for girls, prohibited the denial of access to girls, or guaranteed girls the right to educational advancement. Where we identified no education-specific guarantees either broadly or in access, we assessed whether gender-based discrimination was broadly prohibited in constitutions or legislation.
For sexual harassment, we first examined whether legislation explicitly prohibited sexual harassment in educational settings or by people in a position of authority. If we found no education-specific measures, we separately coded whether sexual harassment was broadly prohibited. For both types of prohibitions, we distinguished between provisions that protected all children or only girls from sexual harassment.
To assess the quality of sexual harassment provisions, we analyzed whether legislation prohibited both sex-based and sexual-behavior based harassment. We separately captured when sexual harassment was not explicitly prohibited but sexual violence was, since this language may protect girls from the most extreme forms of sexual harassment. In addition, we examined what behaviors were legally defined as sexual harassment in education. In doing so, we distinguished between countries that prohibited sexual advances or quid pro quo and those that also included provisions prohibiting conduct that creates a hostile or humiliating environment for learning or undermines students’ dignity.
Minimum Age of Marriage
Because child marriages often take place with the involvement of parents or religious officials, we examined not only the general legal minimum age(s) of marriage for girls and boys but also the minimum age after accounting for legal loopholes permitting earlier marriage with parental consent or under parallel religious or customary legal systems. A small number of countries required the approval of a guardian for females to be married at any age. In these cases, the minimum age of marriage with parental consent was considered the same as the legal minimum age of marriage.
