## Gender Discrimination in Economics

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [Gender Discrimination in Economics](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/fandd/article/2022/december/book-review-kolovich.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/fandd/article/2022/december/book-review-kolovich.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/fandd/article/2022/december/book-review-kolovich.pdf.json)

---

### Overview of the book
- Title reviewed: Gender and the Dismal Science: Women in the Early Years of the Economics Profession by Ann Mari May.
- Publisher details as given: Columbia University Press, New York, NY, 2022, 256 pp., $32.00.
- Reviewer: LISA KOLOVICH, senior economist in the IMF’s Strategy, Policy, and Review Department and coauthor of the paper “IMF Strategy Toward Mainstreaming Gender”.

### Core themes and narrative
- The book offers a rich historical narrative on long-standing sources of gender gaps in the economics profession.
- Draws on AEA archives and a wide range of empirical data to trace the evolution of:
  - social norms and institutional barriers;
  - overt exclusion and discrimination in hiring and promotions;
  - barriers to publishing; and
  - participation in professional associations.
- Weaves personal perspectives and stories of female trailblazers, referred to as “tenacious persisters”.

### Historical evolution and documented barriers
- Coverage period: late 19th century through the post–World War II period in the United States.
- Key historical pressures and institutional responses:
  - Male enrollment in colleges and universities declined during the US Civil War, and more girls than boys graduated from high school, creating pressure to allow women to enroll.
  - Many universities were reluctant to admit women, viewing their presence as a “dangerous experiment” or a direct challenge to men’s livelihoods.
  - First female economics students faced segregation in the classroom, unequal access to libraries and laboratories, and doubts about their inherent abilities to complete rigorous study.
- Post-degree obstacles:
  - Women seeking employment in economics continued to encounter exclusion.
  - Social norms and views on the incompatibility of marriage with an academic career further stymied women’s efforts to contribute fully.

### Empirical findings and professional representation
- AEA membership data (starting in 1886) show a large gap in professional representation:
  - Women comprised only 5 percent of AEA membership over the first six decades of the association’s existence.
- Publication barriers:
  - Women struggled to publish in academic journals.
  - May’s empirical analysis of publications in the American Economic Review and Quarterly Journal of Economics highlights the importance of network connections, which women lacked.
- Contemporary survey evidence cited:
  - Almost half of the female respondents in a 2019 American Economic Association (AEA) survey said that they had been discriminated against based on their sex.
  - 3 percent of male respondents in that survey said they had been discriminated against based on their sex.
  - Male students in US economics PhD programs outnumber female students 2 to 1.

### Intersectionality and underrepresentation
- The book carefully considers intersectionality.
- Presents sobering statistics on how women of color have been marginalized and remain vastly underrepresented in economics.

### Conclusions and policy implications
- May challenges the profession to confront the disconnect between economic scholarship on discrimination and the profession’s own practices.
- The stories of champions, advocates, and “tenacious persisters” are presented as motivation for change.
- Call to action implicit in the review:
  - Break down glass walls and glass ceilings.
  - Diversify a far-too-homogeneous profession.

*Source: book review in Finance & Development, December 2022*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/fandd/article/2022/december/book-review-kolovich.pdf_