you very much for the invitation I
participated in part of the last two
speakers last session two speakers and I
was really impressed by the way the
organizers pulled the program together
you’re so a very emotional beginning and
now you will see the foundation and I
think the glue and the key for that is
where we go to we go to a brave new
world right so my talk will be what has
to do with that and I will try to argue
that there’s very difficult to create
this new brave world without having full
opportunities for women and Without
Really including women into economy it’s
not so easy because if you heard at the
last speaker talking she was the quoting
a nice actually a story when he started
to talk to a stranger and this and
didn’t pay attention what the stranger
says and I’ve had the feeling that it
needs to he said it that it needs time
when he opened up and try to understood
the arguments of the other side so if we
look now at the group of economies as
such they are very closed community and
they believe in certain truths which no
more are operational no more true in
turn if you look from the economic route
for the economic rules and models from
the woman’s perspective or gender
perspective more broadly right so this
is really what I will be talking about
it really is about diversity it’s about
listening to the others and I will try
to convince you that it is worth to do
it it’s not so easy though so if I ask
if anybody believes that economy is
exclusive for woman what would you say
yes or no those who will say yes please
raise your hands good not so many fans
because the economy is not inclusive
and why I mean I just will give you a
few few data in Poland women are well
educated better than men the the
percentage of women with tertiary
education is about close to 60% but
women are only 16% of boards of stock
listed companies much lesser CEOs they
are only a few percentage like five six
percent of women who are the Chiefs in
business then if you look at the
full-time employment rate of woman is
only 43 percent in the population 15
plus while 60% of men work there’s a
certain motherhood penalty because it’s
a bit paradoxical that when the child is
born to a family then woman stop really
working or works much less and also
earns much less her salary goes down if
you look at men main tends to stay
longer at work and they also reward that
in higher salaries and promotions so
this is really a penalty which you can
see very well in data which I’m not
going to store to show you that I will
just say that the wage gap between the
levels on same positions jobs for women
and men is around 18% and he doesn’t
change for many years its share in
parliament women’s share in Parliament
is 27%
it used to be 21% but when Poland
introduced quotas in politics which was
the results of lobbying of women’s
movements in 2011 it was to their jump
from 21% to 27% now but still quite far
from 50 if you look at the gender
equality index of the European Union
Institute for gender equality what a
hundred is the maximum points and
different areas of inequalities are
covered which means power which is
politics knowledge education money
training’s work participation rates
health and time how much time women and
men have for for example caring
functions and their own possibilities to
to develop themselves the you average is
66 points on 100 Poland has 57 percent
and then Sweden the top leader is 82%
percentage points as you see the
distance even if there’s a diversity
among countries Poland and Sweden say
there is still a big difference to be
covered and we can ask a question is the
problem with women or what economics and
I try to investigate this issue because
he seemed to be very interesting you
know economies claim that economy is
gender neutral it does not really
distinguish between women and men and
its rules and mechanism are equally
valid for everyone and it leads to
producing a maximize maximize GDP and
also to to use them in the best way the
natural resources human resources and
capital resources which is not the case
the problem is that this foundation of
economics was actually developed by
fathers of economics by coincidence
there were no matters of economics you
know the most well known economies you
will see the quote at the end of my
speech but the first woman who got the
Nobel Prize in Economics got it only
2009 alone Ostrom so maybe that but
throughout all these centuries because
Adam Smith wrote his The Wealth of
Nations in 1776 it’s the end of 18th
century and until now all these bases
remain the same the key parts of this
reasoning was the so-called economic man
Homo economicus
what’s supposed to represent everyone in
a society and his behavior were part
well really at the main element of all
the developed further theories about
economy about how the economy functions
and how the resources should be divided
and the second probably you know its
notion was the ins if invisible hand of
the market which was driven by profits
right so you had these two elements
which remained with us until today and
students of economics are being taught
how the economics function what are the
foundations it’s when you look closer at
this economic man it looks more like
like a really male person because he’s
very self-sufficient he has no
responsibility to others he doesn’t have
any caring function and surprisingly
depends on someone else who does a lots
of unpaid caring and loving work and
apparently we think now that Adam Smith
probably was influenced by the hero
called Robinson Crusoe and Daniel
Defoe’s bestseller of the times at the
beginning of 18th century when he put it
as a model develop model of development
in in rich words of the of the North
sort of a recipe for success when if you
think about the carrying reproductive
work of women you can see that they are
they are left completely outside
economics and this is what was on
purpose Adam Smith didn’t see women
working on the labor market
he saw women staying at home and taking
care of the others like his mother who
was serving him dinners and was taking
care of his household
he didn’t value this work in terms of
economics because he loved her mother of
course but he didn’t value this this
work in economics because it had a
different motivation it was so cold
invisible heart as compared to invisible
hand driven by profit this was a matter
of the love work right which women do
because they would like to do this they
do it from heart and they don’t ask any
rewards from that ok it this approach
really is missing today the contribution
women make to the economy on this
uncaring caring work which is around
one-third of GDP in Poland but also in
many other countries but also around 50
over 55% of the average wage in Poland
it’s a huge contribution without which
the market would not work so it’s on one
side the problem not seeing the
contribution of women’s unpaid work but
at the same time not seeing their needs
in terms of how the income is
distributed if there is a decision to
build infrastructure like their football
stadiums today for example very actual
with the competitions in Russia or to
being killed kindergardens it’s quite
clear that the option will be more
stadiums because women’s voice is not
heard at decision making levels and
economies do not see it as a certain
contribution on women’s side of course a
woman went a long way from as I remember
it was called in the air in the eighties
even as a disadvantaged group together
with people ethnic minorities and
together with people with disabilities
usually there were different groups of
different types of people right UN
documents refer to that there are number
of them they will enter the labor market
first the secretary’s assistance to
bosses in 60 70s but they are now SEOs
not too many but still they are there a
woman entrepreneurs who are very
successful and we can say of course it’s
a potential it’s a big potential but in
order to be used we
need to level the playing ground it
means the rules and the principles and
mekinese of economics otherwise women
will all enter the labor market with the
double burden of unpaid work which they
need to carry on while trying to make a
career in business or in different
institutions so we have to change the
economic thinking and models and if we
can maybe look what we can do and what
could be done in general what what kind
of solutions could be to include women
into economy in full terms you’ve heard
most likely about quotas rights in
business quotas in corporate boards and
I can tell you that yesterday
Switzerland just joined that signing and
voting in the parliament 95 to 94 by one
voice only the law about 35 percentage
quotas file as I remember but they are
solutions for quota on boards on private
sector companies and public in many
countries the Switzerland joint Norway
France Germany Spain in many other
countries in Poland this discussion is
still a non-starter and most business
are not for quotas but what is
interesting they are much more open that
they used to be maybe three four years
ago when this discussion about quota
started to accept that diversity
argument should bring women more women
at senior positions corporate boards in
business but no quotas and the results
of at the moment when you compare
countries which have quotas and no
quotas it’s a big difference between no
way which reaches almost 40% of women on
board at boards and all France we need
of course different arrangements for
work-life balance and there are many of
them you probably can name them like
flexi time
parental leaves also human resource
policies in recruitment promotion and
career tracks of woman
many companies already apply but the
problem is that in fact the solution is
here that women should do more
professional work and men should really
do more caring work and this balance
should be a little bit more balanced at
the moment it is not so all these flexi
times will not diminish the work women
have to do if they don’t have a partner
who actually shares this work then
gender budgeting which is really having
a woman’s voice on what to spend money
and I can give you probably the vote
will be for quality social
infrastructure caring infrastructure
like kindergarten and nurseries but I
can give you one example from Sweden
there was a debate how to use the
limited amount of money for mmm
eliminating the heavy snow when it comes
suddenly and it was a matter of choosing
between sidewalks and the roads and men
preferred the roads because they drive a
lot of fast right women prefer the
sidewalks and in fact they decided to go
for sidewalks it was a decision of the
Swedish government that in emergency
cases they go rather for sidewalks and I
was the victim of that regulation in
fact because in Stockholm two years ago
I was at the conference it was a unter
desert precedented snowing in November
and it couldn’t really take any cars or
any taxi or any buses everything was
fully covered by snow but the sidewalks
were in the better condition well what
we need in fact we need also a broader
approach to development beyond the GDP
and profits and we should be seeing more
you know heterodox economics framework
like the green economy by coming into
that we need a new value system which
redefines resources and what we value
more and less and how we dialogue with
the society
what they really want when you toss on
new measures of success I just named few
of them and they are mushrooming there
are many many of them now and I like
this one which is gross happiness index
of Bhutan because in Bhutan the highest
priority for the government and for the
king is the people are happy so he
created this gross happiness index which
is very different from gross domestic
income GDP the product gross domestic
product but we have us were the European
Union level the quality of life service
which shows us how is the level of life
satisfaction
we have doubles for F indexes and gender
equality index to end this talk I would
like to say that we need more gender
sensitive economics if we want to make a
change a difference and make progress
and I would like to quote a very
well-known economist the only one in
fact which economic students will name
you because she’s in the textbook but
she didn’t receive the Nobel Prize John
Robinson who was active in the beginning
of the century of the previous century
20th century the purpose of studying
economics is not to acquire a ready-made
answers to economic questions but to
learn how to avoid being deceived by
economists so I encourage you to do that
and try to look through different lenses
to economics and whatever your specialty
will be would it be marketing or
management but or macroeconomics because
it’s worth it without that we cannot
make a better braver word thank you very
much [Applause]
participated in part of the last two
speakers last session two speakers and I
was really impressed by the way the
organizers pulled the program together
you’re so a very emotional beginning and
now you will see the foundation and I
think the glue and the key for that is
where we go to we go to a brave new
world right so my talk will be what has
to do with that and I will try to argue
that there’s very difficult to create
this new brave world without having full
opportunities for women and Without
Really including women into economy it’s
not so easy because if you heard at the
last speaker talking she was the quoting
a nice actually a story when he started
to talk to a stranger and this and
didn’t pay attention what the stranger
says and I’ve had the feeling that it
needs to he said it that it needs time
when he opened up and try to understood
the arguments of the other side so if we
look now at the group of economies as
such they are very closed community and
they believe in certain truths which no
more are operational no more true in
turn if you look from the economic route
for the economic rules and models from
the woman’s perspective or gender
perspective more broadly right so this
is really what I will be talking about
it really is about diversity it’s about
listening to the others and I will try
to convince you that it is worth to do
it it’s not so easy though so if I ask
if anybody believes that economy is
exclusive for woman what would you say
yes or no those who will say yes please
raise your hands good not so many fans
because the economy is not inclusive
and why I mean I just will give you a
few few data in Poland women are well
educated better than men the the
percentage of women with tertiary
education is about close to 60% but
women are only 16% of boards of stock
listed companies much lesser CEOs they
are only a few percentage like five six
percent of women who are the Chiefs in
business then if you look at the
full-time employment rate of woman is
only 43 percent in the population 15
plus while 60% of men work there’s a
certain motherhood penalty because it’s
a bit paradoxical that when the child is
born to a family then woman stop really
working or works much less and also
earns much less her salary goes down if
you look at men main tends to stay
longer at work and they also reward that
in higher salaries and promotions so
this is really a penalty which you can
see very well in data which I’m not
going to store to show you that I will
just say that the wage gap between the
levels on same positions jobs for women
and men is around 18% and he doesn’t
change for many years its share in
parliament women’s share in Parliament
is 27%
it used to be 21% but when Poland
introduced quotas in politics which was
the results of lobbying of women’s
movements in 2011 it was to their jump
from 21% to 27% now but still quite far
from 50 if you look at the gender
equality index of the European Union
Institute for gender equality what a
hundred is the maximum points and
different areas of inequalities are
covered which means power which is
politics knowledge education money
training’s work participation rates
health and time how much time women and
men have for for example caring
functions and their own possibilities to
to develop themselves the you average is
66 points on 100 Poland has 57 percent
and then Sweden the top leader is 82%
percentage points as you see the
distance even if there’s a diversity
among countries Poland and Sweden say
there is still a big difference to be
covered and we can ask a question is the
problem with women or what economics and
I try to investigate this issue because
he seemed to be very interesting you
know economies claim that economy is
gender neutral it does not really
distinguish between women and men and
its rules and mechanism are equally
valid for everyone and it leads to
producing a maximize maximize GDP and
also to to use them in the best way the
natural resources human resources and
capital resources which is not the case
the problem is that this foundation of
economics was actually developed by
fathers of economics by coincidence
there were no matters of economics you
know the most well known economies you
will see the quote at the end of my
speech but the first woman who got the
Nobel Prize in Economics got it only
2009 alone Ostrom so maybe that but
throughout all these centuries because
Adam Smith wrote his The Wealth of
Nations in 1776 it’s the end of 18th
century and until now all these bases
remain the same the key parts of this
reasoning was the so-called economic man
Homo economicus
what’s supposed to represent everyone in
a society and his behavior were part
well really at the main element of all
the developed further theories about
economy about how the economy functions
and how the resources should be divided
and the second probably you know its
notion was the ins if invisible hand of
the market which was driven by profits
right so you had these two elements
which remained with us until today and
students of economics are being taught
how the economics function what are the
foundations it’s when you look closer at
this economic man it looks more like
like a really male person because he’s
very self-sufficient he has no
responsibility to others he doesn’t have
any caring function and surprisingly
depends on someone else who does a lots
of unpaid caring and loving work and
apparently we think now that Adam Smith
probably was influenced by the hero
called Robinson Crusoe and Daniel
Defoe’s bestseller of the times at the
beginning of 18th century when he put it
as a model develop model of development
in in rich words of the of the North
sort of a recipe for success when if you
think about the carrying reproductive
work of women you can see that they are
they are left completely outside
economics and this is what was on
purpose Adam Smith didn’t see women
working on the labor market
he saw women staying at home and taking
care of the others like his mother who
was serving him dinners and was taking
care of his household
he didn’t value this work in terms of
economics because he loved her mother of
course but he didn’t value this this
work in economics because it had a
different motivation it was so cold
invisible heart as compared to invisible
hand driven by profit this was a matter
of the love work right which women do
because they would like to do this they
do it from heart and they don’t ask any
rewards from that ok it this approach
really is missing today the contribution
women make to the economy on this
uncaring caring work which is around
one-third of GDP in Poland but also in
many other countries but also around 50
over 55% of the average wage in Poland
it’s a huge contribution without which
the market would not work so it’s on one
side the problem not seeing the
contribution of women’s unpaid work but
at the same time not seeing their needs
in terms of how the income is
distributed if there is a decision to
build infrastructure like their football
stadiums today for example very actual
with the competitions in Russia or to
being killed kindergardens it’s quite
clear that the option will be more
stadiums because women’s voice is not
heard at decision making levels and
economies do not see it as a certain
contribution on women’s side of course a
woman went a long way from as I remember
it was called in the air in the eighties
even as a disadvantaged group together
with people ethnic minorities and
together with people with disabilities
usually there were different groups of
different types of people right UN
documents refer to that there are number
of them they will enter the labor market
first the secretary’s assistance to
bosses in 60 70s but they are now SEOs
not too many but still they are there a
woman entrepreneurs who are very
successful and we can say of course it’s
a potential it’s a big potential but in
order to be used we
need to level the playing ground it
means the rules and the principles and
mekinese of economics otherwise women
will all enter the labor market with the
double burden of unpaid work which they
need to carry on while trying to make a
career in business or in different
institutions so we have to change the
economic thinking and models and if we
can maybe look what we can do and what
could be done in general what what kind
of solutions could be to include women
into economy in full terms you’ve heard
most likely about quotas rights in
business quotas in corporate boards and
I can tell you that yesterday
Switzerland just joined that signing and
voting in the parliament 95 to 94 by one
voice only the law about 35 percentage
quotas file as I remember but they are
solutions for quota on boards on private
sector companies and public in many
countries the Switzerland joint Norway
France Germany Spain in many other
countries in Poland this discussion is
still a non-starter and most business
are not for quotas but what is
interesting they are much more open that
they used to be maybe three four years
ago when this discussion about quota
started to accept that diversity
argument should bring women more women
at senior positions corporate boards in
business but no quotas and the results
of at the moment when you compare
countries which have quotas and no
quotas it’s a big difference between no
way which reaches almost 40% of women on
board at boards and all France we need
of course different arrangements for
work-life balance and there are many of
them you probably can name them like
flexi time
parental leaves also human resource
policies in recruitment promotion and
career tracks of woman
many companies already apply but the
problem is that in fact the solution is
here that women should do more
professional work and men should really
do more caring work and this balance
should be a little bit more balanced at
the moment it is not so all these flexi
times will not diminish the work women
have to do if they don’t have a partner
who actually shares this work then
gender budgeting which is really having
a woman’s voice on what to spend money
and I can give you probably the vote
will be for quality social
infrastructure caring infrastructure
like kindergarten and nurseries but I
can give you one example from Sweden
there was a debate how to use the
limited amount of money for mmm
eliminating the heavy snow when it comes
suddenly and it was a matter of choosing
between sidewalks and the roads and men
preferred the roads because they drive a
lot of fast right women prefer the
sidewalks and in fact they decided to go
for sidewalks it was a decision of the
Swedish government that in emergency
cases they go rather for sidewalks and I
was the victim of that regulation in
fact because in Stockholm two years ago
I was at the conference it was a unter
desert precedented snowing in November
and it couldn’t really take any cars or
any taxi or any buses everything was
fully covered by snow but the sidewalks
were in the better condition well what
we need in fact we need also a broader
approach to development beyond the GDP
and profits and we should be seeing more
you know heterodox economics framework
like the green economy by coming into
that we need a new value system which
redefines resources and what we value
more and less and how we dialogue with
the society
what they really want when you toss on
new measures of success I just named few
of them and they are mushrooming there
are many many of them now and I like
this one which is gross happiness index
of Bhutan because in Bhutan the highest
priority for the government and for the
king is the people are happy so he
created this gross happiness index which
is very different from gross domestic
income GDP the product gross domestic
product but we have us were the European
Union level the quality of life service
which shows us how is the level of life
satisfaction
we have doubles for F indexes and gender
equality index to end this talk I would
like to say that we need more gender
sensitive economics if we want to make a
change a difference and make progress
and I would like to quote a very
well-known economist the only one in
fact which economic students will name
you because she’s in the textbook but
she didn’t receive the Nobel Prize John
Robinson who was active in the beginning
of the century of the previous century
20th century the purpose of studying
economics is not to acquire a ready-made
answers to economic questions but to
learn how to avoid being deceived by
economists so I encourage you to do that
and try to look through different lenses
to economics and whatever your specialty
will be would it be marketing or
management but or macroeconomics because
it’s worth it without that we cannot
make a better braver word thank you very
much [Applause]
Please follow and like us: