74
Economic Opportunities for Women in the East Asia and Pacific Region
needs and concerns. In India, a study showed that when leadership positions in village councils were reserved for women, the decisions of those councils would result in greater infrastructure investment that was directly relevant to the needs of rural women (Chattopadhyay and Duflo 2001). Within the East Asia and Pacific region, another example is that of New Zealand and the evolution of the parliamentary agenda on child care and maternity leave. Between 14.4 percent and 16.5 percent of New Zealand’s parliamentary seats were occupied by women from 1987 to 1992. During that time, women politicians were responsible for 50 of the 75 discussions of child care and parental leave. During the next seven years from 1993 to 1999, the same two “women’s issues” were mentioned 75 times in the House, with female MPs responsible for 59 of these incidences. During this period, between 21.2 and 29.2 percent of parliamentary seats were held by women (Grey 2001). Whether “women’s issues” get adequate legislative attention is a more complex matter than simply the proportion of women in political decision-making positions, yet the positive correlation is clear. For example, figure 3.4 shows the correlation between the proportion of women in parliament and the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) maternity leave score (EIU forthcoming; see figure 2.15 for definition of this score). The significant numbers of data points both above and below the line suggests that more is in play; for example, former socialist countries often make generous maternity leave provisions without significant numbers of women in parliament. However, the correlation remains positive when controlling for GDP per capita. Although increasing the political participation of women is necessary, it is not sufficient to improve regulatory cognizance of gender issues.2 On the private sector side, it is important to initiate constructive dialogue between businesspeople and the government officials in charge of private sector development. Evidence is emerging that this sort of publicprivate dialogue can produce tangible improvements in the business environment, but these improvements must be anchored in credible institutions, have “champions of change” in both government and the private sector, and have high degrees of cooperation within the private sector itself. (See, for example, an impact assessment of the effectiveness of public-private dialogue in the Mekong region, which argues that significant reforms in trade facilitation, contract enforcement, and access to land are directly attributable to business forums [HR Inc. and MCG Management Consulting 2008].) Singapore provides a good example of how public-private dialogue is improving the business environment and helping to ensure that