• FWX Mar qtr 2024  78.3
  • FWX yr-o-yr  3.66
  • FWX qtr-o-qtr  2
  • ASX 200 Boards years to equality  5.6
  • Underemployment years to equality  19.9
  • Superannuation years to equality  17.7
  • Gender pay gap years to equality  23.3
  • Employment years to equality  25.6
  • Unpaid work years to equality  45.5
  • Education years to equality  389

Are study choices the key to equality progress?

Evie Fox Koob of Deloitte Access Economics shares insights on how study choices are holding back women and what to do about it.
November 30, 2022

The Australian workforce is highly segregated by gender. Four out of five workers in aged care, for example, are women, and nearly nine in ten construction workers are men.

The latest FWX shows that this labour market divide, which begins in our tertiary study choices, is the most significant contributor to Australia’s struggle to reach gender parity any time soon.

Apart from equity reasons, why does gender segregation matter?

Wages in feminised industries are lower on average. Recent analysis showed that 20% of the gender pay gap can be attributed to industrial segregation, and another 4% to occupational segregation.

Multiple studies (see here for example) link the gender imbalance of industries and occupations to a less productive economy, because workers are not best matched to jobs that align with their individual talent, skills or capability.

And we also desperately need more workers in the care economy to manage an ageing population, with the skills shortage in aged care is projected to reached 400,000 by 2050.

Not that this issue is unique to Australia. In fact, a new range of research shows that more progressive countries actually have less balanced workforces in terms of gender than less progressive countries.

For example, a smaller percentage of women are STEM graduates in the Nordic countries of Sweden, Finland and Norway than less gender equal countries such as Albania and Algeria. And only 19% of engineering majors are held by women in the United States, compared to 40% in Jordan.

This surprising result has been dubbed the “gender-equality paradox”. Researchers argue that it is easier for fundamental gender stereotypes about professions to materialise in countries with fewer economic constraints.

In other words, with fewer concerns about finances, women in developed countries have more freedom with their study choices based on personal factors. And then internalised gender norms about jobs creep in – evident in that people in more gender equal countries more strongly associate with the stereotype that ‘maths is not for girls’.

These findings tell us that we can’t assume that as countries and generations become more progressive over time, women and men will more evenly sort into jobs.

It is a circular issue that women select into the industries that society expects of them, and then are paid less because society places lower value on feminised industries. As researchers from Cornell University found, when women enter fields in large numbers, average pay declines – even when you control for factors like education, work experience, skills, race and geography.

The key to progress is therefore the revaluing of feminised industries (particularly the care economy). Not only will this reduce the remuneration gap directly – including in Australia – but it will provide the proper incentives for men to select into traditionally feminised industries and reduce the self-selection disparity itself.


Financy is a fearless believer in equality and using data insights to accelerate organisational progress in diversity, equity & inclusion.

Related Articles


Leave us A Comment

November 30, 2022
Proudly Supported by

Get the full Insights

Enter your details below to instantly receive the latest Women’s Index report

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Fortnightly Fix

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.