GEM

TECHNICAL NOTE

This GEM platform offers two key functions:

It visualizes gender inequality at sub-national level, including gender inequality index (GII), and gender gaps in various sectors such as education, health, employment, household decision-making etc. using periodically updated and official gender dis-aggregated data.
It offers gender data repository for public use.

Framework: How the datasets are constructed?

The GII was introduced by UNDP in 2010 to measure inequalities between men and women in three dimensions: reproductive health, empowerment and the labor market. The GII intends to demonstrate the loss in human development due to gender gaps. The GII ranges from 0 (gender equality) to 1 (gender inequality in all measured dimensions) (Human Development Index, 2014). Click here for more information about UNDP's GII methodology.

Read our full Technical Note to learn more on the methodology used.

USER GUIDE

Gender Equality Monitoring tool is developed to address two key issues: gender data gap at sub-national level, and accessibility to gender statistics which is critical to examine and track changes in gender inequality.

Read our tool guidelines to discover more.

DATA SOURCES

Data sources of statistical data used in our GEM Tool can be found at the following url:

Click here

REFERENCES/DOCUMENTS

How to use

Cambodia: Standard DHS, 2014

Gender Inequality Index (GII)

LIMITATIONS

Data in this platform is mostly disaggregated by sex, hence does not allow for intersectional analysis with other social identities such as non-binary, age, disability, ethnicity, caste, education, wealth etc.
Comparing sectoral gender gaps between countries is challenging because there is a lack of common definition of datasets. Comparing sub-nation GII is also not advisable because the datasets for the calculation of GII are slightly varies between the countries due to the unavailability of data.
Sometime, tracking change within a country is also challenging, particularly when the country has adjusted data definition.
Nevertheless, the GEM reveals data gaps that would hopefully call for better cooperation on data collection and data sharing among state agencies.