Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 Gender Equality

Lorraine Eden; M. Fernanda Wagstaff

doi:10.1057/s42214-020-00054-w

Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 Gender Equality

Eden, Lorraine; Wagstaff, M. Fernanda 2020-07-17 00:00:00 Lorraine Eden and Evidence-based policymaking (EBP) contends that policy decisions are M. Fernanda Wagstaff successful when informed by evidence. However, where policy problems are ‘‘wicked’’ (systemic, ambiguous, complex, and conﬂictual), politics trumps Department of Management, TAMU 4221, Mays evidence and solutions are never ﬁrst best or permanent. Applying an EBP Business School, Texas A&M University, approach to solving wicked problems (WPs) therefore appears to be a College Station, TX 77843-4221, USA; daunting, impossible task. Despite the difﬁculties, we contend that blending Department of Marketing and Management, The insights from the EBP and WP literatures can provide actionable and practical University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX 79968, USA policy advice to governments and MNEs for dealing with the WPs of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We support our thesis with a case Correspondence: study applying EBP to the WP of SDG 5 Gender Equality. We compare the L Eden, Department of Management, TAMU statistical evidence from gender inequality indexes to SDG 5’s targets and 4221, Mays Business School, Texas A&M indicators. We provide ﬁve insights from the EBP and WP literatures into why University, College Station, TX 77843-4221, and how good evidence is necessary but not sufﬁcient for progress on SDG 5. USA Building on these insights, we recommend that governments adopt an EBP e-mail: [email protected] approach employing public–private partnerships to address SDG 5. We also recommend that MNE executives use our new SDG Materiality Matrix, designed on EBP principles, to build SDG 5 into their global corporate social responsibility strategies. Journal of International Business Policy (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s42214-020-00054-w Keywords: sustainable development; gender equality; corporate social responsibility; evidence-based policymaking; wicked problems; gender inequality indexes; materiality; nonmarket strategy; policy-oriented studies INTRODUCTION On 25 September 2015, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, a general pledge to ‘‘transform our world’’ and ‘‘leave no one behind’’ in terms of the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development (UN, 2015b). The 2030 Agenda estab- lished 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with a long list of targets and indicators that were to be collected, shared, and monitored by the UN Member States. Received: 27 May 2019 The 2030 Agenda is a form of goal-based global governance, Revised: 19 May 2020 where the 17 global goals deﬁne the sustainable development Accepted: 21 May 2020 Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff aspirations of UN Member Countries and their management or leadership mindsets, or with old major stakeholders (Fukuda-Parr, 2014). Global organizational structures’’ (van Tulder, 2018: 34). If goals are instruments that ‘‘translate norms from WPs cannot be solved, policymakers may instead the language of words to that of numbers, coupled need to focus on managing or coping (Daviter, with setting time bound targets’’ (Fukuda-Parr & 2017; Head, 2019: 183). Assuming WPs scholars are McNeill, 2018: 6). Since the SDGs are voluntary, correct, and slow progress on the SDGs was lack sanctions, and have few mechanisms to ensure inevitable, what can policymakers do to ensure their achievement, the 2030 Agenda is a form of that the SDGs get back on track, or – given the ‘‘soft’’ international law (van Zanten & van Tulder, global crisis now unfolding – that the SDGs are not 2018: 212). derailed permanently? Progress on the 2030 Agenda has been slow, and We contend that insights from the evidence- criticisms have begun to appear. A January 2020 based policymaking (EBP) literature can be helpful editorial in Nature (2020) argued that the SDGs in spotlighting difﬁculties and suggesting policy were ‘‘not on track’’ and had a ‘‘bleak trend.’’ Nature directions for managing the WPs of the 2030 noted that only two targets were close to being Agenda. EBP puts ‘‘the best available evidence from achieved, and predicted that most SDGs would miss research at the heart of policy development and their 2030 target date. Lack of funding (an esti- implementation’’ (Davies, 2004: 3). EBP scholars mated shortfall of 2.5 trillion USD) and lack of recognize that good evidence is necessary but not government commitment were suggested as possi- sufﬁcient for good policymaking. Recognition that ble causes. There are also other reasons why the EBP is being applied to WPs can help dampen SDGs may be off track. For example, scholars have policymaker expectations, point out where difﬁcul- argued that many SDG targets are so conceptually ties and disputes are likely, and clarify achievable complex that they cannot be translated into mea- metrics for success. surable indicators (Breuer, Janetschek, & Malerba, We illustrate how insights from both the WP and 2019). The SDGs themselves may be a problem, EBP literatures can be useful for addressing the 2030 both their lack of prioritization (Breuer et al., 2019) Agenda through a case study of SDG 5 Gender and their number; there may be ‘‘too many goals, Equality, ‘‘achieve gender equality and empower all too little focus’’ for meaningful policymaking women and girls’’ (UN, 2015b: 14). Gender equality (Selin, 2015:1). was originally a UN 2000–2015 Millennium Devel- The prospects for achieving the SDGs by 2030 opment Goal, which was carried over as SDG 5 in have now become signiﬁcantly worse since the the 2030 Agenda (UN, 2015a, b). The global goal for COVID-19 pandemic spread across the globe in SDG 5 is to achieve gender equality, and to early 2020. In March, the estimated global cost of empower women and girls by eliminating gender the pandemic for 2020 in terms of forgone world disparities, discrimination, and violence against GDP was $1 trillion USD (Garten, 2020); by May, women (UN, 2015b). A case study of SDG 5 is the estimate for 2020–2021 had risen to a 2-year particularly appropriate because this year marks the loss of $8 trillion USD (UN, 2020: 1). The UN 25th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Secretary-General has called the coronavirus the Platform for Action that asserted that women’s ‘‘most challenging crisis since World War II’’, one rights were human rights (UN Women, 1995). This that could cause a recession with ‘‘no parallel in the year is also the 20th anniversary of the UN Security recent past’’ (Lederer, 2020). The effects are Council’s Resolution 1325 on women, peace, and expected to be catastrophic for developing coun- security, and the 10th anniversary of the establish- tries, and halt progress towards the SDGs ment of UN Women (UN Women, 2020). Our study (UNCTAD, 2020b). of SDG 5 is also especially salient, given that the We believe that slow progress on the 2030 harmful impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic are Agenda was inevitable, even before the coronavirus expected to fall disproportionately on women pandemic, because the issues the UN are addressing (Alon, Doepke, Olmstead-Rumsey, & Tertilt, 2020; are wicked problems (WPs; Rittel, 1972; Rittel & UNCTAD, 2020a). Webber, 1973; Alford & Head, 2017; Head, 2019). We begin by reviewing the WP literature and its WPs are ‘‘systemic in nature, complexly interre- applicability to the 2020 Agenda, focusing on SDG lated, and materialize at the interface between 5. We next analyze the existing evidence on gender public–private and proﬁt–nonproﬁt interests’’; as a equality. We employ country-based comparisons of result, they cannot be handled with ‘‘old the best-available gender inequality indexes, and Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff assess their ability to appropriately measure SDG 5’s or wrong; thus, a systems approach was unlikely to targets and indicators. We then turn to the EBP be successful. literature and show how EBP can provide useful Since the late 1970s, the WP literature has grown insights for policymaking when faced with WPs. dramatically, in terms of both the number of We argue that the generation and dissemination of scholarly disciplines and policy areas. Ten key high-quality, reliable evidence is necessary but not propositions underlie WP theory (see, e.g., McCall sufﬁcient for making progress on the 2030 Agenda. & Burge, 2016; Crowley & Head, 2017; Peters & Policymakers must also prepare for the many ‘‘slips Tarpey, 2019: 236), which are summarized below: between the cup and the lip’’ that bedevil EBP in • Problem: (1) hard to deﬁne and no deﬁnite addressing WPs. Lastly, we build on these insights formulation; (2) no stopping rule; (3) unique; to develop policy recommendations for govern- (4) multiple explanations; and (5) may be symp- ments and multinational enterprises (MNEs) for tomatic of another problem. dealing with the WP of SDG 5. Figure 1 provides an • Solution: (1) not true or false but only good or bad; outline of our paper. (2) no immediate or ultimate test; (3) no clear solution or even set of possible solutions; (4) attempts at solutions have effects that may not be THE WICKED PROBLEM OF SDG 5 GENDER reversible or forgettable; and (5) policymakers EQUALITY bear the responsibility for wrong solutions. What are Wicked Problems? The WP literature began as a critique of the systems WP scholars believe that most policy problems approach to policymaking (Rittel, 1972; Rittel & have some degree of wickedness, so they cannot be Webber, 1973). In the systems approach, the plan- solved using rational-scientiﬁc methods (Newman ner implements a policy cycle with several steps: & Head, 2017). Complexity is viewed as a key understand the problem; gather and analyze evi- driver of wickedness, both the complexity of the dence; generate and assess solutions; and imple- problem (factual uncertainty) and of the actors/ ment, test, and modify the solution. Rittel (1972) institutions involved (Alford & Head, 2017; Davi- and Rittel and Webber (1973) criticized the systems ter, 2019). As the number and diversity of stake- approach, arguing that it could only handle ‘‘tame’’ holders and institutional contexts rise, so does the problems. Since WPs were inherently unsolvable, heterogeneity of preferences and interests, increas- their solutions could only be good or bad, not right ing the likelihood of conﬂict (Bannink & Trommel, Figure 1 Applying evidence- The Wicked The Role of Evidence in Creating Good SDG 5 Policy Problem of SDG 5 Implications Evidence-Based Policymaking Evidence for SDG 5 based policymaking to the wicked problem of SDG 5 2030 Agenda Steps in Steps in Evidence-Based Gender Equality. Policymaker Policymaking Evidence Collection � Governments � Selection of Targets • Agenda Setting �SDG 1 and Indicators � Multinational � Policy Formulation �SDG 2 Enterprises � Selection of Data �SDG 3 Sources � Collect best available �SDG 4 � Assignment of Data evidence Evidence-Based Collection Roles and Actions � Interpret evidence for the Responsibility policy context � SDG 5: � Creation of Data � Evidence Collection Gender Protocols, Manuals, Equality and Training Materials � Policy Selection � Evidence used in Policy � Data Collection and � Policy Implementation � Selection Reporting �SDG 6 � Implementation � Policy Monitoring, Evaluation & � Data Cleaning and � Monitoring Revision �SDG 7 Quality Analysis � Evaluation �SDG 8 � Revision � Preparation of � Set up monitoring Statistics and Indexes �... procedures, measures � Dissemination of and instruments �… Results � Evaluate policy using �SDG 17 monitoring evidence Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff 2019). Uncertainty and ambiguity exacerbate both 2030 Agenda is that no one must be left behind – a complexity and conﬂict, increasing the degree of huge societal challenge. Speciﬁc vulnerable groups wickedness (van Tulder, 2018). are also regularly mentioned (e.g., women, chil- Key issues in the WP literature are how to address dren, minorities, migrants, refugees) and no vul- a WP and how to deﬁne success. Since WPs ‘‘are nerable groups can be left behind. never solved. At best they are only resolved – over To explore the WP of the 2030 Agenda in more and over again’’ (Rittel & Webber, 1973: 160), depth, we provide a case study of SDG 5 Gender policymakers cannot achieve ﬁrst-best solutions. A Equality ‘‘achieve gender equality and empower all frequent recommendation for addressing WPs, women and girls’’ (UN, 2015b: 14). SDG 5 is building on Rittel and Webber (1973), is that new decomposed into 9 targets and 14 indicators (UN, and different ways of thinking are needed, and so 2019); see Table 1. Ten of the other SDGs also also is collaboration or partnering among societal include gender-speciﬁc indicators; as a result, 22% actors where they share joint responsibility for the of the indicators for the 17 SDGs are gender speciﬁc solutions (Ney & Verweij, 2015; Crowley & Head, (UN, 2019: 21–23), implying that gender equality is 2017; Daviter, 2017; Termeer & Dewulf, 2019). an important, cross-cutting goal in the 2030 An unexpected and paradoxical consequence of Agenda. framing policy problems as wicked is that policy- The word ‘‘gender’’ refers to ‘‘the socially-con- makers may choose to do nothing and just live with structed roles and responsibilities that societies the problem (Bannink & Trommel, 2019). ‘‘Paraly- consider appropriate for men and women’’ (Peace sis occurs when people experience or deﬁne the Corps, 2020). Gender equality means that ‘‘women wickedness as so overwhelming that it discourages and men enjoy the same rights and opportunities them and prevents them from doing anything across all sectors of society, including economic about it’’ (Termeer, Dewulf, & Biesbroek, 2019: participation and decision-making, [and that]…. 176). Paralysis can be particularly wicked when the different behaviours, aspirations and needs of grand societal challenges are framed negatively women and men are equally valued and favoured’’ (van Tulder, 2018: 19). To avoid choice paralysis, (UNCTAD, 2016: 31). Gender equality is a ‘‘funda- policymakers are encouraged to explore ‘‘intelligent mental human right’’ and ‘‘keystone of a prosper- modes of imperfect governance’’ (Bannink & Trom- ous, modern economy that provides sustainable mel, 2019: 198), and to look for solutions that are inclusive growth’’ (OECD, 2017:3). ‘‘clumsy’’ or ‘‘just viable’’, which ‘‘everyone can In the international business (IB) literature, gen- more or less agree to live with’’ and are ‘‘responsive der equality has typically been deﬁned as equal to different rationalities’’ (van Tulder, 2018: 39). treatment of women and men in the workplace Policymakers are also encouraged to focus on (Eden & Gupta, 2017; O’Brien, Fitzsimmons, Crane, identifying, valuing, and learning from ‘‘small & Head, 2017; UNCTAD, 2014, 2018; UN Economic wins’’ (Termeer & Dewulf, 2019). Small wins are Commission for Europe, 2019b). Workplace gender preferable to either doing too little (i.e., settling for inequality is viewed as having many causes, includ- paralysis or ‘‘cherry-picking’’ the least wicked parts ing gender discrimination and stereotyping, under- of a problem) or expecting too much (i.e., the valuation of women’s work, gender-based labor solving of an inherently unsolvable problem). market segmentation, traditions and culture that treat men and women unequally, and work–life SDG 5 Gender Equality as a Wicked Problem balance issues (UNCTAD, 2014: 4). O’Brien et al. Scholars clearly view the 2030 Agenda as an (2017) hypothesize that workplace gender inequal- example of a WP (Head, 2019; van Tulder, 2018). ity has three WP characteristics: divergence, com- A core thesis of van Tulder (2018: 37) is that all 17 plexity, and uncertainty. There are divergent views SDGs are WPs. The SDGs are ‘‘systemic in nature, about the problem, no agreed deﬁnitions, and large complexly interrelated and materialize at the inter- differences in values, underlying beliefs and inter- face between public–private and proﬁt–nonproﬁt pretations of ﬁndings. Workplace gender inequality interests. They are wicked both by nature and also suffers from complexity due its multiple design’’ (van Tulder, 2018: 36) because they suffer causes, lack of a dominant solution, and complex from uncertainty, complexity, erratic dynamics, linkages with other societal issues. Lastly, uncer- and ambiguity – all symptoms of WPs. The SDGs tainty affects problem deﬁnition, prevents optimal are societal problems, not tame or technical prob- solutions, and causes unintended consequences. lems; for example, the guiding principle of the The authors argue that policymaking requires Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Table 1 SDG 5 targets, indicators, and gender equality metrics SDG 5 Target SDG 5 Target Indicators GII GGGI SIGI EM 2030 SDG Index 5.1 End all forms of discrimination against 5.1.1 Whether or not legal frameworks are in all women and girls everywhere place to promote, enforce and monitor equality and non-discrimination on the basis of sex 5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against 5.2.1 Proportion of ever-partnered women all women and girls in the public and and girls aged 15 years and older subjected private spheres, including trafficking and to physical, sexual or psychological violence sexual and other types of exploitation by a current or former intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by form of violence and age 5.2.2 Proportion of women and girls aged 15 years and older subjected to sexual violence by persons other than an intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by age and place of occurrence 5.3 Eliminate all harmful practices, such 5.3.1 Proportion of women aged 20– as child, early and forced marriage and 24 years who were married or in a union female genital mutilation before age 15 and before age 18 5.3.2 Proportion of girls and women aged 15–49 years who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting, by age 5.4 Recognize and value unpaid care and 5.4.1 Proportion of time spent on unpaid domestic work through the provision of domestic and care work, by sex, age and public services, infrastructure and social location protection policies and the promotion of shared responsibility within the household and the family as nationally appropriate 5.5 Ensure women’s full and effective 5.5.1 Proportion of seats held by women in participation and equal opportunities for (a) national parliaments and (b) local leadership at all levels of decision-making governments in political, economic and public life 5.5.2 Proportion of women in managerial positions 5.6 Ensure universal access to sexual and 5.6.1 Proportion of women aged 15– reproductive health and reproductive 49 years who make their own informed rights as agreed in accordance with the decisions regarding sexual relations, Programme of Action of the International contraceptive use and reproductive health Conference on Population and care Development and the Beijing Platform for 5.6.2 Number of countries with laws and Action and the outcome documents of regulations that guarantee full and equal their review conferences access to women and men aged 15 years and older to sexual and reproductive health care, information and education 5.a Undertake reforms to give women 5.a.1 (a) Proportion of total agricultural equal rights to economic resources, as population with ownership or secure rights well as access to ownership and control over agricultural land, by sex; and (b) share over land and other forms of property, of women among owners or rights-bearers of financial services, inheritance and natural agricultural land, by type of tenure resources, in accordance with national 5.a.2 Proportion of countries where the legal laws. framework (including customary law) guarantees women’s equal rights to land ownership and/or control 5.b Enhance the use of enabling 5.b.1 Proportion of individuals who own a technology, in particular information and mobile telephone, by sex communications technology, to promote the empowerment of women 5.c Adopt and strengthen sound policies 5.c.1 Proportion of countries with systems to and enforceable legislation for the track and make public allocations for gender promotion of gender equality and the equality and women’s empowerment empowerment of all women and girls at all levels Sources: for SDG 5 targets and indicators: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/indicators-list/; for GII metrics see http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/ gender-inequality-index-gii; for GGGI metrics see WEF (158, Table 1); for SIGI see Branisa et al. (2014 and Supplemental Material); for EM2030 see EM2030 and Supplemental Material at https://data.em2030.org/2019-sdg-gender-index/methodology/, for SDG Index see SDSN (2019, Tables 5 and 7). These metrics may cover partially or totally the target indicators. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff methodological reﬂexivity, the ability to see mul- women lead the authors to conclude that ‘‘the true tiple world views, and the need to pay attention to clash of civilizations is not about religion or context. Rational approaches based on a single ethnicity but about the subordination of women’’ discipline cannot handle the WP of achieving (Hudson et al., 2020: 377). Thus, whether measured workplace gender equality. as workplace gender equality or as women’s It is important to recognize, however, that SDG 5 empowerment, SDG 5 is a wicked problem. is about more than workplace gender equality; it is also about the empowerment of women and girls. The MEASURING GENDER (IN)EQUALITY goal of SDG 5 is equality between men and women in their rights and opportunities, their valuation The Gender Inequality Indexes and treatment, and their empowerment (i.e., the One way to assess gender inequality is to examine fostering of women’s voice and agency). Women’s government policies and laws promoting gender empowerment can be deﬁned as ‘‘a woman’s sense equality; however, policies on the books are not the of self-worth, her decision-making power, her same as policies in practice. A second way is to access to opportunities and resources, her power examine gender-based statistics, and, in fact, statis- and control over her own life inside and outside the tical indexes are the most common empirical home, and her ability to effect change’’ (Peace method for assessing differences between men Corps, 2020). and women. The two best-known indexes are the Women’s empowerment has been shown to be a UN Development Programme’s (UNDP’s) Global fundamental and necessary input for economic and Inequality Index (GII), available since 2010, and social development. The most recent empirical the World Economic Forum’s (WEF’s) Global Gen- evidence on the negative economic and social der Gap Index (GGGI), available since 2006. Given consequences of disempowering women (such as that the GII and GGGI were not developed for SDG worse governance, more conﬂict, less stability, 5, a few international and non-governmental orga- worse economic performance, and slower social nizations (NGOs) have started to build new indexes progress) can be found in Hudson, Bowen and for SDG 5, responding to the UN (2015a, b). These Nielsen (2020). The authors assert that women’s indexes (the OECD’s SIGI, the SDSN SDG Index, disempowerment is pervasive and embedded in and the Equal Measures 2030 2019 SDG Gender societies around the world. Disempowerment has Index) attempt to measure gender equality across four dimensions: status (whether male and female countries and across time by collecting a broad set groups engage as equals or as subordinate and of socio-economic indicators on workplace gender superordinate), decision-making (whether deci- inequality and women’s empowerment. Below, we sions are made by one or both groups), conﬂict brieﬂy review the ﬁve indexes and compare them in resolution (how disagreements are resolved, terms of SDG 5’s targets and indicators. whether one group can be coerced against its will), and resource distribution (whether control over The UNDP global inequality index (GII) resources is by one or both groups). Hudson et al. The GII is designed to measure the human devel- (2020) argue that patrilineal/fraternal networks opment costs of gender inequality; i.e., the higher (e.g., tribes and clans) support and encourage the GII value, the greater the gender gap and the practices that disempower women, such as violence larger the loss in human development (UNDP, towards women, personal status laws beneﬁtting 2018, 2019). The GII measures inequality between men, laws that prevent women from owning men and women in terms of economic opportu- property, preferences for sons over daughters, and nity, reproductive health, and empowerment. The polygyny. The authors create a women’s disem- GII combines women-speciﬁc indicators with indi- powerment index to assess the presence or absence cators for both men and women; some scholars of these harmful practices in 176 countries over view this as an ‘‘odd mixture’’ of ‘‘women status’’ 2010–2015, ﬁnding that 56 countries score low on (level) and ‘‘gender inequality’’ (gap) (Permanyer the index (mostly OECD countries), 40 countries 2013a, b: 940). Table 1 compares the components score high (primarily in Sub-Saharan Africa, the of GII to the SDG 5 targets and indicators; Table 2 Middle East, and West and South Asia), and the rest summarizes the GII targets, indicators and data are in between (Hudson et al., 2020: 54). The sources. pervasiveness of these harmful practices against Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff The WEF global gender gap index (GGGI) Equal Measures 2030 SDG gender index (EM 2030 The GGGI measures the gap between men and gender index) women in four target areas: economic participation The EM 2030 index uses indicators developed by the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indi- and opportunity, health and survival, political empowerment, and educational attainment. The cators. The index was developed from several GGGI is reverse-coded from the GII so a higher frameworks: the UN Women SDG Indicator Frame- GGGI score implies a country is closer to equality work and Women Turning Promises into Action (GGGI = 1; GII = 0). Table 1 compares the compo- report, the UN Minimum Set of Gender Indicators agreed by the UN Statistical Commission in 2013, nents of GGGI to the SDG 5 targets and indicators, and Table 2 summarizes the GGGI targets, indica- and the Ready to Measure study produced by tors and data sources. Table 2 also compares the GII DATA2x (EM 2030, 2019; Buvinic, Furst-Nichols, and GGGI in terms of their targets and indicators; & Koolwal, 2014; Buvinic & Levine, 2015). There differences between the two indexes are shown in are two EM 2030 indexes; a broad index including 51 gender-related indicators from 14 SDGs and a bold text. The index is designed to disassociate the gender narrower index for only SDG 5 indicators. Table 1 gap from a country’s level of economic develop- compares the components of the narrower index to ment, i.e., the index uses the male–female gap, not the SDG 5 targets and indicators. Higher scores the actual level, for each indicator. The GGGI also represent greater gender equality. uses ratios, and caps each ratio at 1 (gender The SDSN SDG gender index (SDSN gender index) equality) for countries where women outperform The Sustainable Development Solutions Network or have reached parity with men on the indicator. (SDSN) and Bertelsmann Stiftung developed the The index is also designed to capture outcomes SDG Index and Dashboards to cover all 17 SDGs rather than causal factors of gender inequality, such (Schmidt-Traub, Kroll, Teksoz, Durand-Delacre, & as culture or government policies. In sum, the Sachs, 2017; Sachs, Schmidt-Traub, Kroll, LaFor- GGGI measures gaps not levels, outcomes not tune, & Fuller, 2019). The SDG targets are grouped inputs, and equality not empowerment (WEF, into ‘‘ﬁve P’s: Prosperity, People, Planet, Peace, and 2020: 45). Partnership.’’ Country scores range from 0 to 100, The OECD social institutions and gender index (SIGI) with higher scores representing greater gender equality (Sachs et al., 2019: 1). The components The SIGI was created to track progress on gender of the SDSN gender index relative to the SDG 5 equality for the 2015 Millennium Development Goals (Branisa, Klasen, Ziegler, Drechsler, & Jutting, targets and indicators are reported in Table 1. 2014: 31–32). Its ﬁve targets (discrimination in the Statistical Comparison of the Indexes family, restricted physical integrity, restricted To date, only the GII and GGGI have sufﬁcient access to productive and ﬁnancial resources, and years of data to compare them over time; it will be restricted civil liberties) are meant to capture the some years before the other indexes are sufﬁciently deprivation of women caused by gender gaps in developed to make robust historical comparisons. social institutions (OECD, 2018a, b, 2019). Data We focus below on the GII and GGGI, building on from the OECD’s Gender, Institutions and Devel- Eden and Gupta (2017). opment Database are used to create the SIGI, which is currently available for 4 years (2009, 2012, 2014, The UNDP gender inequality index (GII) 2018). The SIGI scores 120 countries and organizes Table 3 shows the GII scores for several years them into quintiles; thus, the SIGI not only has a between 2000 and 2017. Note that lower GII values shorter time series but also includes fewer countries represent greater movement toward SDG 5. The than either the GII or the GGGI (OECD, 2019). world average GII score fell from 0.432 in 2000 to Table 1 compares the components of the SIGI to 0.350 in 2017; thus, the gender gap shrank by the SDG 5 targets and indicators. The index is 18.9% between 2000 and 2017. Given that gender reverse-coded like the GII where 0 represents per- equality is deﬁned as GII = 0, a 35% gap still exists fect equality and 1 perfect inequality. between men and women as of 2017. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Table 2 GII and GGGI targets and indicators GII targets and indicators GGGI targets and indicators Economic opportunity Economic participation and opportunity • Labor force participation for women age 15 and older (ILO) • Labor force participation: female/male (ILO, ILOSTATAT) • Labor force participation for men age 15 and older (ILO) • Wage equality between women and men for similar work (WEF-Executive Opinion Survey) • Estimated earned income: female/male (WEF- UNDP methodology) • Legislators, senior ofﬁcial and managers: female/male (ILOSTAT) • Professional and technical workers: female/male (ILOSTAT) Reproductive health Health and survival • Number of women who died from pregnancy-related causes • Sex ratio at birth: female/male (UN Population for every 100,000 live births (UN Maternal Mortality Division, World Population Prospects) Estimation Group) • Healthy life expectancy: female/male (WHO, • Birth per 1000 women ages 15–19 (UNDESA) Global Health Observatory) Empowerment Political empowerment • Percentage of parliamentary seats held by women (IPU) • Seats in parliament: female/male (Inter-Parliamentary • Percentage of women age 25 and older with at least some secondary Union, Women in Politics) education (UNESCO Institute for Statistics; Barro & Lee, 2016) • Positions at ministerial level: female/male (IPU, • Percentage of men age 25 and older with at least some secondary Women in Politics) education • Number of years with a female head of state (last 50 years): female/male (WEF calculations) Educational Attainment (UNESCO Institute for Statistics Education Indicators) • Literary rate: female/male • Net primary enrolment: female/male • Net secondary enrolment: female/male • Gross tertiary enrolment: female/male Data sources in parentheses. Bold text shows that indicators are included in that index but missing from the other index. ILO International Labor Organization; WEF World Economic Forum; UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientiﬁc and Cultural Organization; UN United Nations; WHO World Health Organization; UNDESA United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs; IPU Inter-Parliamentary Union. The UNDP also calculates and publishes the looking vertically (by year), we calculate the gap in Human Development Index (HDI) in which coun- GII scores between the bottom (Low HDI) and top tries are grouped into clusters based on their (Very High HDI) groups, as a raw score and ratio. economic and social development levels. The HDI The gap between the raw scores falls slightly groupings can help us see how different country between 2000 and 2017, implying a small narrow- groups are progressing towards gender equality ing of the gender gap. The ratio of the raw scores relative to one another and over time. We calculate (Low HDI/Very High HDI) rises from 2000 to 2017, and report the GII score in Table 3 for the four HDI suggesting that Low HDI group lagged behind the groups in two different ways. First, for each row other HDI groups in improvements in gender (HDI group), we calculate the difference in GII equality. scores between the base year (2000) and the most The WEF global gender gap index (GGGI) recent year (2017), as a raw score and as a percent of We also collected GGGI data for 2006–2017 and the base year. Since lower GII scores reﬂect greater linked the GGGI data with the UNDP’s HDI coun- gender equality, negative numbers represent try groups; our statistical results are reported in improved performance and closer movement Table 4. The world average GGGI rose between toward SDG 5. Looking from left to right across 2006 and 2017 from 0.663 to 0.698, implying a each row (each HDI group), we ﬁnd that gender modest 3.5% improvement in gender equality. As equality improved (i.e., the GII score fell) for all of 2017, the gender gap recorded by the GGGI is four HDI groups. The improvement was largest in 30.2%, a bit smaller than the 35% gap recorded by the High and Very High HDI countries. Second, Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Table 3 The UNDP gender inequality index, 2000–2017 Country average by Human 2000 2005 2010 2013 2014 2017 Point gap Percent change Development Index (HDI) Group 2000–2017 2000–2017 World average 0.4315 0.4199 0.3886 0.3754 0.3659 0.3500 -0.0815 -18.89 Very High HDI countries 0.2112 0.1991 0.1825 0.1532 0.1500 0.1520 -0.0592 -28.04 High HDI countries 0.4927 0.4119 0.3887 0.3560 0.3458 0.3457 -0.1470 -29.83 Medium HDI countries 0.5419 0.5419 0.4939 0.4852 0.4716 0.4761 -0.0658 -12.14 Low HDI countries 0.6746 0.6396 0.6035 0.5953 0.5929 0.6024 -0.0722 -10.70 Point gap between Low and Very High 0.4633 0.4404 0.4210 0.4421 0.4429 0.4504 HDI countries Ratio of Low HDI to Very High HDI 3.1936 3.2116 3.3064 3.8866 3.9520 3.9632 countries No. of countries with data points 83 137 133 152 155 160 Source: Authors’ calculations based on GII data from the UNDP website: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/gender-inequality-index-gii. the GII. Looking across the rows in Table 4, gender included in GGGI that are missing from GII (e.g., inequality fell in all four HDI groups, with the wage equality, female/male ratio of earned largest improvement in the Low HDI group. Look- income). ing down the columns, the gap between the raw A second reason is that the goals and how they scores of the low and very high HDI countries fell are implemented differ between the two indexes. over the period, while the ratio of the raw scores The GGGI is designed to remove country levels of (Low HDI/Very High HDI) rose slightly, indicating economic development; i.e., the index reﬂects gaps that the GGGI gap narrowed across the HDI groups in gender equality ignoring the development in over time. Thus, measured across HDI groups, the each country. The GII, on the other hand, is gender gap between Low and Very High HDI designed to incorporate the loss in human devel- countries narrowed, suggesting that improvements opment as a function of gender inequality (Per- in gender equality were larger in Low HDI manyer, 2013a, b; Piper, 2019; WEF, 2018, 2020). countries. The differential treatment of economic develop- ment is clear when we compare the GGGI and GII Assessing the Evidence on Gender Equality scores across the four HDI country groupings. Table 3 shows that the GII score for Low HDI Comparing the GII and GGGI: Why are their country countries is nearly four times the score for Very rankings so different? High HDI countries. Table 4, on the other hand, A comparison between the results for the GII in shows very small differences in GGGI scores across Table 3 and the GGGI in Table 4 reveals a perplex- the four HDI groups. Even when one inverts the ing picture. Table 3 shows a large gap in GII scores ratio because GGGI is reverse-coded from GII, there between Low and Very High HDI country groups is little variance by HDI level in the GGGI com- that widens over time. Table 4, on the other hand, pared with the GII. This result is deliberate: the shows that the gap in GGGI scores between Low GGGI is designed to disassociate the gender gap and Very High HDI countries is much smaller and from country levels of development, while GII is narrows over time. Both indexes are on a scale of 1 designed to include the impact of gender inequality although they reverse code equality [gender equal- on potential human development. As a result, some ity = 0 (GII), 1 (GGGI)]. What explains the differ- scholars worry that the GII may be proxying not ences between the two indexes, when considered only for differences in gender equality but also for by HDI group? differences in living standards across countries; this We hypothesize that the puzzling ﬁndings noted concern does not apply to the GGGI (Sotsky, above are due, ﬁrst, to differences in the targets and Shibuya, Kolovich, & Kebhai, 2016). indicators for the GII and GGGI. Table 2 puts in bold text the indicators that are included in one Two-country case study: Mozambique and Nicaragua index but not the other. There are several differ- As a second exploration of the underlying differ- ences; e.g., there are four economic indicators ences between the GII and the GGGI, we provide a brief two-country case study. We selected two Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff developing countries: Mozambique and Nicaragua. Both countries are ranked, when compared with the world average, relatively low on the GII but relatively high on the GGGI. Table 5 provides data for the two countries in terms of all ﬁve gender indexes (where available). We highlight in bold text the score of the country (Mozambique or Nicar- agua) that performs better on each indicator. We also provide average world scores for comparison. As Table 5 shows, Nicaragua outperforms Mozambique on all ﬁve gender indexes and on most indicators. Both countries rank poorly on the GII (Mozambique = 138; Nicaragua = 106) but do well on the GGGI (Mozambique = 29; Nicaragua = 6). The ﬁrst reason for why both countries do poorly on the GII but well on the GGGI is because their indicators also do so; i.e., selection of the indicators is a key reason for the anomaly. The second reason is also visible; i.e., the way the indicators are measured. By focusing on gaps not levels and outcomes not inputs, the GGGI takes economic development out of the equation, whereas the GII deliberately includes human devel- opment. Thus, with GGGI – but not GII – women may be worse off (in absolute terms) even though the gender gap is small. Workplace gender equality versus women’s empowerment Our analysis of the GII and GGGI shows clearly that the two indexes are more narrowly focused than SDG 5. The targets and indicators for SDG 5 are designed to capture both gender inequality and empowerment, particularly for marginalized groups and others ‘‘left behind.’’ The SDG 5 targets also consider not only gender inequality outcomes but also their antecedents, such as government poli- cies, laws, and customs. As Table 1 shows, with the exception of target 5.5 (women’s leadership) and target 5.c (policies and laws), neither GII nor GGGI cover the other targets and indicators in SDG 5. We conjecture that the narrow foci of the GII and GGGI reﬂects an implicit focus on gender equality in the workplace rather than empowerment of women and girls. For example, neither the GII nor GGGI incorporate measures that Hudson et al. (2020) see as critical components of women’s disempow- erment. As a result, neither the GII nor the GGGI is as comprehensive as UN SDG 5, which treats gender equality from a holistic perspective, consid- ering voice, agency, and the empowerment of women and girls. Journal of International Business Policy Table 4 The WEF global gender gap index, 2006–2017 Country average by Human 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2016 2017 Point gap Percent Development Index (HDI) 2006– change Group 2017 2006–2017 World average 0.6626 0.6677 0.6751 0.6784 0.6786 0.6799 0.6844 0.6864 0.6947 0.6978 0.0352 5.3110 Very High HDI countries 0.6903 0.6972 0.7016 0.7050 0.7121 0.7136 0.7154 0.7179 0.7223 0.7256 0.0353 5.1084 High HDI countries 0.6637 0.6670 0.6763 0.6774 0.6734 0.6728 0.6756 0.6790 0.6856 0.6944 0.0307 4.6226 Medium HDI countries 0.6543 0.6571 0.6621 0.6725 0.6709 0.6713 0.6758 0.6782 0.6936 0.6947 0.0404 6.1774 Low HDI countries 0.6005 0.6102 0.6228 0.6246 0.6226 0.6314 0.6458 0.6463 0.6645 0.6643 0.0638 10.6215 Point gap between Low and -0.0898 -0.0871 -0.0789 -0.0804 -0.0895 -0.0822 -0.0696 -0.0716 -0.0578 -0.0613 Very High HDI countries Ratio of Low HDI to Very High 0.8699 0.8751 0.8876 0.8860 0.8743 0.8848 0.9027 0.9003 0.9200 0.9155 HDI countries No. of countries with data 110 122 124 128 130 131 133 136 144 144 points In calculating the overall GGGI average we used all 144 countries in the GGGI dataset. However, because North Korea is missing an HDI score and group, we used 143 countries in calculating the HDI country groupings. Source: Authors’ calculations based on WEF data for the Global Gender Gap. Data for 2016 and 2017 are from WEF (2017). Data for 2006–2013 are from the Humanitarian Data Exchange at https:// data.humdata.org/dataset/global-gender-gap-index-world-economic-forum. Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Table 5 Comparison of Nicaragua and Mozambique gender equality scores, 2017–2018 Mozambique Nicaragua World Overall SDG and SDG 5 scores and ranks UNDP GII Score (higher ? less gender equality) 0.552 0.456 0.441 UNDP GII Country Rank (out of 160 countries) 138 106 WEF GGGI Score (higher ? more gender equality) 0.741 0.814 0.680 WEF GGGI Country Rank (out of 144 countries) 29 6 OECD SIGI Score (higher ? less gender equality) .24 .19 .29 OECD SIGI Country Rank (out of 120 countries) 55 30 SDSN SDG 5 Score (higher ? more gender equality) 60.0 82.1 60.17 SDSN SDG 5 Country Rank (out of 162 countries) 81 14 EM 2030 SDG 5 Score (higher ? more gender equality) 61.1 73.4 62.0 EM 2030 SDG 5 Country Rank (out of 129 countries) 114 84 UNDP GII Indicators Female labor force participation rate (%, age 15+) 82.5 50.3 48.7 Male labor force participation rate (%, age 15+) 74.6 84.0 75.3 Maternal mortality ratio (deaths per 100,000 live births) 489 150 216 Adolescent birth rate (births per 1000 women aged 15–19) 135.2 85.4 44.0 Share of seats in parliament (% held by women) 39.6 45.7 23.5 Female population, some secondary education (%, age 25+) 16.1 48.3 62.5 Male population, some secondary education (%, age 25+) 27.3 46.6 70.9 WEF GGGI targets/indicators Economic participation and opportunity 0.789 0.702 0.65 Educational attainment 0.857 1.00 0.96 Health and survival 0.977 0.98 0.97 Political empowerment 0.34 0.576 0.20 SDSN SDG 5 Indicators Unmet demand for contraception 56.8 7.2 NA Female/male mean years of schooling 54.3 106.3 NA Female/male labor force participation rate 110.6 59.9 NA Seats held by women in national parliaments 39.6 45.7 NA Bold text highlights the score of the country (Mozambique or Nicaragua) that performs better on each indicator. Sources: EM 2030 (2019), OECD (2019), Sachs et al. (2019), UNDP (2018), and WEF (2018). Our assessment that the GII and GGGI do not Which is the best index? It depends capture women’s disempowerment suggests that The ﬁve gender indexes that we have reviewed the newer gender inequality indexes – SIGI, EM above vary enormously in focus, breadth and 230, and SDSN SDG 5 – should be better proxies for depth, and sophistication. Some indexes use indi- the targets on SDG 5. However, reliable and com- cators based on gaps between men and women; plete data are very hard to ﬁnd for many SDG 5 others look at women’s levels. Some indexes vary indicators, particularly those for marginalized with a country’s level of economic development, groups, and it will be years before longer time while others attempt to remove the relationship series datasets become available. Time series between gender inequality and the standard of indexes take time to build. We conclude that, at living. Some indexes are narrowly focused on least for the present, although the three new gender women at work, while others include many socio- indexes based on SDG 5 look very different on paper cultural and legal indicators designed to capture from the old gender inequality indexes (GII and broader issues of women’s empowerment. Some GGGI), the new indexes in practice are much closer indexes have long historical time-series datasets, while others are just beginning to ﬁnalize method- to the GII and GGGI, particularly for developing countries for which data for the SDG 5 targets and ologies, collect data, and report statistics on a cross- indicators are very scarce. Still, as these new section basis. Some indexes weight all their com- indexes mature, better evidence on women’s ponents equally, while others use unequal weights. empowerment should become available. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff So how can policymakers decide which of the ﬁve 2004: 3). While EBP has been primarily used in gender inequality indexes is best for tracking their OECD countries, EBP has also been applied in country’s performance on SDG 5? Similarly, how developing countries (Sutcliffe & Court, do MNE executives select an index to track their 2005, 2006; Bartlett, 2013; Hewlett Foundation, company’s gender equality performance, at home 2018). and in their foreign afﬁliates? We offer three The original approach to EBP assumes a linear insights into these questions. First, we argue that relationship between evidence and policy choice there is no single right answer. Policymakers and where the policymaker deﬁnes a problem, identiﬁes MNE executives need to match their selection of a what is known, collects the best available evidence, gender inequality index with the speciﬁc gender and makes a policy choice. The basic steps in EBP equality goals and targets they are trying to are outlined in Figure 1. The current approach to achieve. The ‘‘best’’ gender inequality index for EBP embeds evidence into the policy cycle process one government or one MNE may not be the same in a circular fashion, as shown in Figure 2. The EBP for another where their goals and targets differ. policy cycle starts with agenda setting, moves There may be no ‘‘best’’ index nor ‘‘off the shelf’’ through policy formulation, selection, and imple- solution; it may be that a single index is not mentation, to monitoring, evaluation, and revi- sufﬁcient and will need to be assembled from sion, in a circular fashion. different indexes. Second, policymakers and MNE Good evidence is a fundamental component of executives need to understand why and how the the EBP cycle. The key evidence steps in EBP are various indexes are constructed; that is, making a illustrated in the circled and bold text items in the ‘‘deep dive’’ into the selection and measurement of second box in Figure 1; the sub-steps in the indicators and construction of the indexes. A evidence collection phase are shown in the third thorough analysis of the various indexes is a box in Figure 1. The evidence steps are also high- necessary ﬁrst step to selecting or creating an lighted in Figure 2 as steps 5 (obtaining evidence), 7 inequality index that best ﬁts the organization. (interpreting evidence), 13 (monitoring), and 14 Third, our overall assessment is that, given their (evaluation). Thus, collecting, analyzing, and using strengths and weaknesses, the GII and GGGI are good evidence are key elements in successful EBP. better able to usefully inform policymakers and Wicked Problems and Evidence-Based MNE executives on how to move toward SDG 5 in Policymaking terms of workplace gender equality. For more Can EBP be applied successfully to WPs? One might holistic measures of gender equality that take think that EBP should be applicable to WPs, given account of women’s empowerment, policymakers that both the WP and EBP literatures have their must look to the new SDG 5 gender indexes. historical roots in the systems approach to plan- Policymakers should also study Hudson et al.’s ning. However, the WP literature arose as a critique (2020) new women’s disempowerment measure. of the systems approach, whereas the EBP literature adopted the systems approach and the policy cycle EVIDENCE-BASED POLICYMAKING as part of EBP. As a result, neither literature has had AND THE WICKED PROBLEM OF THE SDGS much to do with the other for the past 40 years We turn now to the second part of our analysis. (Head, 2019). Given the existing evidence on gender inequality, In fact, the WP literature has been very critical of how can policymakers use this evidence to address the EBP approach. WP scholars have long argued the WP of SDG 5? We contend that EBP is the that the rational, step-based approach to policy- appropriate response. making illustrated in Figure 2 is incapable of addressing policy problems that are ill-deﬁned, What is Evidence-Based Policymaking? complex, and amorphous (Newman & Head, The premise behind EBP is that policy decisions are 2017; Daviter, 2019; Head, 2019; Termeer et al., more likely to result in better outcomes when 2019). Because poorly structured problems cannot informed by evidence (Scott, 2005). EBP uses ‘‘open, be handled by ‘‘advanced and precise analytic smart and trusted statistics [that are] relevant for methods’’, EBP ‘‘will predictably fail to grapple with the society’’ (Rademacher, 2019: 524), and puts ‘‘the the challenge of wicked problems’’ (Daviter, 2019: best available evidence from research at the heart of 67). policy development and implementation’’ (Davies, Journal of International Business Policy POLICY FORMULATION Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Figure 2 Evidence-based AGENDA SETTING policymaking – a policy cycle approach. 1. Policy maker awareness of issue 2. Define policy problem, causes & needs 15. Modify and recalibrate policy 3. Identify knowledge gap 14. Evaluate policy using monitoring evidence 4. Set policy objectives 5. Obtain best available 13. Set up monitoring evidence procedures, measures and instruments 6. Consult with stakeholders 12. Implement projects & programs 7. Interpret evidence for policy context 11. Adopt regulations and procedures 8. Construct policy alternatives 10. Identify actors and roles 9. Select preferred policy option POLICY IMPLEMENTATION POLICY SELECTION EBP is also criticized for its implicit assumption and public management literatures for 40 years, that ‘‘access to better knowledge….will lead to WP theory would beneﬁt from reconnecting with greater consensus on how to improve policy out- these ﬁelds. He argues that WP theorists need to comes’’. WP scholars argue instead that ‘‘political ‘‘draw more deeply on cutting-edge developments dynamics… cannot be neutralized by a dose of in contemporary policy sciences’’, and that policy- evidence, no matter how relevant or powerful’’ makers need ‘‘to use best available evidence and to (Newman & Head, 2017: 419). WP scholars assert communicate the value of open processes for that policymaking is based, not on scientiﬁc evi- tackling complex and wicked problems’’ (Head, dence, but on ‘‘stakeholder perceptions, values and 2019: 192). Given ‘‘populist distain for expertise’’ interests in explaining how issues are scoped, and ‘‘widespread lack of trust in the institutions of priorities are set and possible solutions considered’’ public governance’’, Head (2019: 192) concludes (Head, 2019: 188). Politics drives policy, not evi- that WP theorists need to use ‘‘best available dence, according to WP theorists. As a result, the evidence.’’ WP literature has been critical of and has ignored At the same time, EBP scholars have also moved EBP for decades. away from the simple model in Figure 2, recogniz- We contend that EBP can provide useful insights ing that ‘‘it is a long away from getting the facts for addressing the WPs of the 2030 Agenda. Our straight to analyzing complex policy problems’’ thesis may appear overly optimistic, disingenuous, (Daviter, 2019: 70). In pluralistic societies, political or even radical, given the criticisms of EBP by WP dynamics and embeddedness can matter as much scholars noted above. We believe, however, that or more than evidence in an EBP process, even both literatures can inform each other and are when facing ‘‘tame’’ (technical or scientiﬁc) prob- particularly useful for analyzing the WP of the 2030 lems (Newman & Head, 2017). The current EBP Agenda. literature is also sensitive to several issues that are The timing may also be right for exploring inherent in WPs, such as complexity, uncertainty, connections between these two literatures. ambiguity, and divergence (Head & Alford, 2015). Recently, a few WP scholars have begun to take a Many ambiguities, for example, are likely involved second, more positive look at scientiﬁc approaches in applying EBP to a WP: ambiguities in framing and EBP. For example, Head (2019: 183) contends the issue (given interdependencies), determining that, after ignoring insights from the policy studies the evidence (sorting opinions from facts, deciding Journal of International Business Policy MONITORING, EVALUATION AND REVISION Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff what is relevant), selecting targets (that are typi- Moreover, evidence is generally assumed to be cally moving), selecting and implementing a policy synonymous with empirical evidence, with the or policies (which may have unintended conse- implicit assumption that ‘‘hard’’ evidence (ofﬁcial quences), and monitoring outcomes (relative to an statistics, econometrics, indexes) is more rigorous unknown counterfactual) (van Tulder, 2018: 43– than ‘‘soft’’ evidence (qualitative studies, expert 50). evaluations). However, empirical ﬁndings are typ- Given these trends, we believe that the time is ically built on mathematical models that involve right for exploring how insights from the WP and simpliﬁcation and parsimony, which suggests that EBP literatures could help devise appropriate public drawing policy recommendations from empirical policies for managing the WPs of the SDGs. results may not only be meaningless but potentially harmful. Saltelli and Giampietro (2017: 64) note Blending Insights from the EBP and WP that it is ‘‘one thing…to use a model to simulate a Literatures policy, another story is the leap whereby the same Below, we explore ﬁve insights drawn from the EBP model is used to justify one.’’ and WP literatures, which we believe could help Thus, the ﬁrst step in EBP, the collection and policymakers address the WP of the 2030 Agenda. provision of good evidence, is a necessary but onerous and contentious requirement for success- Insight #1: Good evidence is necessary ful EBP. Moreover, while collecting, building, and but not sufﬁcient analyzing ‘‘good evidence’’ are necessary steps, they The proper application of EBP requires the creation are not sufﬁcient. A successful EBP process needs to and use of good evidence, which raises method- recognize and account for factors other than ological questions among stakeholders over ‘‘what evidence that inﬂuence the policy process. Aware- is evidence’’ and how to make it accessible to ness of these potential problems is critically impor- policymakers. High-quality evidence is deﬁned as tant for governments and MNE executives as they the ‘‘best available’’ evidence that is appropriate for attempt to choose and implement the WP of the the problem and has been ‘‘systematically searched, 2030 Agenda. critically appraised, and rigorously analysed accord- ing to explicit and transparent criteria’’ (Davies, Insight #2: Good evidence may be misunderstood 2004: 7). Most EBP scholars agree that all forms of or misused by policymakers evidence collected through a systematic process Even though the adage ‘‘better statistics, better should be included, e.g., theory building, data decision-making’’ is widely accepted, there can be collection, and analysis, and practice-based wisdom ‘‘slips between the cup and the lip’’ that derail an (Sutcliffe & Court, 2006: 2). At the other end of the EBP process. Policymakers may be ‘‘ﬂying blind: scale, EBP scholars also agree that using poor- trying to make policy decisions in the dark’’, even quality research as evidence clearly reduces the when good evidence exists, if the evidence cannot efﬁcacy of EBP. be found, or is misunderstood (Hewlett Founda- However, once we move past these two zones of tion, 2018: 3). agreement (what is in/what is out), disputes emerge For example, high-quality evidence may not be because the ‘‘devil is in the details.’’ A ﬁrst problem sufﬁcient to motivate policymakers if they do not is that deﬁnitions of what constitutes appropriate have the policy capacity or level of expertise evidence can vary across stakeholders, ranging needed to understand or use the evidence (New- from narrow (e.g., peer-reviewed academic journal man, Cherney, & Head, 2017). Successful EBP articles) to broad (e.g., professional experience, requires the government sector to have skilled stakeholder accounts). Stakeholders also disagree analytical staff that are trained in data analysis on what constitutes evidence in different issue and policy evaluation (Head, 2010). The level of areas. Nutley, Davies and Walter (2003: 31–32), for training and professional competence of civil ser- example, note that health care has an ‘‘established vants and government legislators varies across hierarchy of evidence for assessing what works’’; countries, along with their access to resources and whereas ﬁelds such as education and criminal institutional infrastructure. Policy capacity is typi- justice are ‘‘riven with disputes’’ over what is cally much lower in developing than in developed appropriate evidence. countries (Howes, Betteridge, Sause, & Ugyel, 2017). Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Misuse and misunderstanding of research ﬁnd- (Davies, 2004; Head, 2010; De Marchi, Lucertini, ings by policymakers can also be caused by the & Tsoukia ` s, 2016; Richards, 2017; Saltelli & researchers themselves, who seldom consider ‘‘pol- Giampietro, 2017). icymaker friendliness’’ when disseminating their In theory, the selection and measurement of research ﬁndings. Researchers need to communi- targets and indicators for building good evidence cate well to ‘‘make their research relevant and should be decisions made on technical or scientiﬁc readable’’ (Oliver & Cairney, 2019: 3). There are also grounds. In practice, the evidence collection stage multiple ways in which numbers can be misunder- can become a highly contested, political activity stood or misinterpreted, creating ‘‘mutant statis- because the measurement tools are essential to tics’’ that lead to bad policymaking (Best, 2012). deﬁning the goals (Fukuda-Parr & McNeill, 2018). Examples include problems of generalizability, def- Getting appropriate ‘‘buy-in’’ from politicians inition, inadequate measurement, bad samples, and bureaucrats to using EBP can also be difﬁcult. changing the meaning of statistics, garbling com- ‘‘[P]ractitioners need incentives to use evidence and plex statistics, and compounding errors by creating to do things that have been shown to be effective. chains of bad statistics. To prevent such technical This also means not doing things that have been biases, new institutions for good governance of shown to be ineffective or even harmful’’ (Davies, evidence may be needed if EBP is to function 2004: 20). Policymakers must have the capability, effectively (Parkhurst, 2017). opportunity, and motivation to use evidence before It is also possible that the specialized knowledge they engage in behavioral change (Langer, Tripney, of academics can be counterproductive, creating & Gough, 2016: 4). Outside events, such as pressing contentious debates over highly technical alterna- but unqualiﬁed threats, can also cause policymak- tives among experts on different sides of the ers to ‘‘throw caution to the wind’’, ignore evidence, problem. The uncertainty of social science and and make quick, precautionary decisions (Mon- the different status of knowledge ﬁelds can cause aghan, Pawson, & Wicker, 2012). Arguing that policymakers to doubt or refuse to include partic- evidence should prevail over pragmatism is difﬁcult ular studies as evidence, leading to disputes for politicians where politics and budget con- between policymaking groups. Where WPs are straints are likely to be more important than involved, there may be equally compelling evi- evidence in driving policymaking (Richards, 2017). dence that supports competing perspectives, caus- These political realities at every stage in the EBP ing stakeholders to privilege the evidence that process accord well with the concerns of WP favors their own position (Daviter, 2019: 67). A theorists. One of the core insights of the WP related concern is the politicization of science literature is that the political arena is the true whereby policymakers bury, misuse, manipulate, battleﬁeld in policymaking because public policy or cherry-pick evidence to support and promote problems are inherently political problems (New- their own policy preferences. EBP can be turned man & Head, 2017; Head, 2019). As the wickedness into policy-based evidence, generated by mecha- of a problem increases, conﬂicts among stakehold- nisms such as knowledge monopolization, blame ers with differing values become more important avoidance, black-boxing, or oversimpliﬁcation of and the usefulness of scientiﬁc evidence the evidence (Strassheim & Kettunen, 2014: 263). diminishes. Insight #3: Good evidence is often trumped by politics Insight #4: Good evidence needs networks While EBP scholars stress the role played by good and partnerships evidence, they also recognize that exogenous and Networks and partnerships among the various endogenous factors other than evidence are regu- stakeholders in EBP – government, business, non- governmental organizations (NGOs), policy think larly – and legitimately – involved in policymaking. Examples include the experience, expertise, and tanks, academics, and the general public – are judgment of policymakers; the constraints of ﬁnite necessary for successful EBP, particularly in demo- resources; the importance of values such as ideol- cratic systems and when dealing with WPs (Ney & Verweij, 2015; Crowley & Head, 2017; Daviter, ogy and political beliefs and the role of habit and 2017; Termeer & Dewulf, 2019). Partnerships are tradition; the power exerted by lobbyists, pressure groups, and consultants; and, more generally, the ‘‘voluntary and collaborative relationships between pragmatics and contingencies of political life various parties, both State and non-State, in which all participants agree to work together to achieve a Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff common purpose or undertake a speciﬁc task and successfully implementing EBP in developing coun- to share risks and responsibilities, resources and tries are likely to be large, possibly much larger than beneﬁts’’ (UN, 2005, par. 8, p. 4). those found in case studies of EBP in OECD Partnerships between government policymakers countries (Sutcliffe & Court, 2005, 2006; Bartlett, and their stakeholders can offer beneﬁts, such as 2013; Hewlett Foundation, 2018). access to resources, capacity and coalition building, Only a few developing countries have embraced more policy relevant research, and linkages with and attempted to implement EBP; for example, stakeholders (Richards, 2017). EBP is more likely to Malawi (Government of Malawi, 2016) and Tanza- be successful when the ‘‘actors in the evidence-to- nia (Lubua & Maharaj, 2012). The reasons for why policy ecosystem…..have regular opportunities to EBP initiatives have failed in developing countries connect with each other, develop relationships of include the application of orthodox approaches mutual trust and respect, and exchange ideas and inappropriate to countries at different stages of learning’’ (Hewlett Foundation, 2018: 8). development, weaker economic conditions and Academics and policymakers have historically more difﬁcult political environments (e.g., political been viewed as ‘‘two communities’’ with few con- volatility, corruption), and institutional voids (Data tacts and bridges, either formal or informal, for African Development Working Group, 2014; between them (Caplan, 1979). While evidence Hewlett Foundation, 2018). Even where interna- suggests the situation is better now than in the tional organizations have developed EBP ‘‘tool- 1970s (Newman, Cherney, & Head, 2016), it is still boxes or kits’’ for developing countries, a common the case that factors which could encourage net- concern is that the toolkits may be ideologically- working, such as knowledge brokers, shared agen- based, promoting orthodox policies inappropriate das, and common meeting places (e.g., joint for countries at different stages of development conferences), are often missing or weak (Lugo-Gil, (Sutcliffe & Court, 2005, 2006; European Commis- Jean-Baptiste, & Livia Frasso Jaramillo, 2019). For sion, 2017b). The heterogeneity of developing example, academic scholars are seldom motivated economies also makes it difﬁcult to translate the to work on policy issues nor encouraged to dissem- lessons from EBP case studies carried out in one inate their research ﬁndings in ways that reach developing country to another because the envi- policymakers or to interact in policy circles. The ronmental contexts are so different. ‘‘publish-or-perish’’ syndrome and the rewards sys- Even for a single developing country, the hurdles tems in universities do not privilege policy-based can be interactive and reinforce one another. A research or reward linkages between government particularly difﬁcult ‘‘cocktail’’ is the mix of poor and academia, viewing them as consulting or evidence, political realities, and weak academic– secondary contributions to knowledge (Eden, Lund policymaker networks (Hantrais, Lenihan, & Dean, & Vaaler, 2018, Chapter 28). Academics MacGregor, 2015). While there is some research need to learn the ‘‘dos and don’ts’’ of how to on how to successfully apply EBP in developing inﬂuence policy (Oliver & Cairney, 2019). For country contexts (see, e.g., the Overseas Develop- expert advice to be helpful, academic experts may ment Institute’s RAPID Framework; Sutcliffe & also need to be more formally embedded in the Court, 2005, 2006; Court & Young, 2006), clearly policymaking process and able to think ‘‘outside the hurdles are higher and the success stories fewer the box’’ of their own discipline and specialty in number. (Daviter, 2019). Problems at the single country level are com- pounded in a multi-country framework where Insight #5: Good evidence here may not work there attempting to implement EBP generates huge A concern particularly salient for IB scholars arises coordination issues. Examples are Bartlett’s (2013) from the difﬁculty of applying EBP in different study of the hurdles faced by applying EBP to labor- country settings. Context matters, and ‘‘what works skill policies in the EU enlargement countries and here may not work there.’’ A simple but telling Lofstedt & Schlag’s (2017) study of the debate over example is the need for and difﬁculty of adapting banning the chemical Bisphenol A in the European policies that work in OECD countries to the very Union. different and differing institutional contexts of The problems of applying EBP to multiple coun- developing economies. While EBP has been used tries are even more acute in developing countries. A mostly in OECD countries, most EBP experts useful (and timely, given the current COVID-19 agree that the potential economic gains from pandemic) analysis of the challenges is the study by Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Andrus, Jauregui, De Oliveria and Ruiz Matus UN Women has been actively leading the process (2011) of the Pan American Health Organization’s for SDG 5, working with PARIS21, a worldwide ProVac Initiative in the Americas, which was network of statisticians and other stakeholders that designed to ensure that developing countries had are committed to EBP in the public sector. Their equitable access to new vaccines. The authors goal is to develop better gender statistics through found that more lives were saved more quickly assessing country-level data and statistical capacity when national governments had sufﬁcient policy gaps, with the ultimate goal of using these assess- capacity, took responsibility for helping to pay for ments to develop better strategies for national and distribute the vaccines, and were supported by statistics (UN, 2013, 2016; UN Women and strong partnerships with international PARIS21, 2019). UN Women (2018, 2019a) has set organizations. up a Women Count Data Hub with an SDGs In sum, ‘‘what works there may not work here’’ Dashboard (https://data.unwomen.org/countries) reminds us that an EBP approach to WPs will be where raw data are posted and analyzed, by coun- particularly difﬁcult in multi-country cases with try, for as many of the SDG indicators as possible. multiple stakeholders and wide differences in The OECD is also heavily involved in the SDGs institutional contexts and levels of development. project, providing ‘‘snapshots’’ of OECD member Top–down, ‘‘one size ﬁts all’’ policies – even where countries and their performance on the SDGs (see, the deﬁnition of success is tackling, managing or e.g., OECD, 2018). Once SDG 5’s targets and indi- coping – are unlikely to be accepted or successful. cators are ﬁnalized, governments and intergovern- mental agencies have committed to collecting and reporting statistics annually (UN Statistics Division, POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS UNSD, 2020; UN, 2015b; Allen et al., 2018). Socio- FOR THE WICKED PROBLEM OF SDG 5 demographic statistics are to be collected on As we have shown above, determining what is and everyone, including marginalized populations (e.g., how to use high-quality evidence in an EBP frame- the homeless, migrants, minorities, and the work is far from easy and especially difﬁcult where underground economy) that are typically difﬁcult WPs are involved. Despite these difﬁculties, we or impossible to track. Data collection so far has argue that policymakers can beneﬁt from applying been difﬁcult, and less than half the SDG indicators the EBP and WP literatures to the WPs of the SDGs. are high quality and many are completely Drawing on these insights, we make some policy missing. recommendations for governments and MNEs for The activities above involving SDG 5 are steps in addressing the WP of SDG 5 Gender Equality. the ‘‘evidence collection’’ stage of an EBP process. As Figure 1 shows, once a goal has been deﬁned, SDG 5 Policy Recommendations for Governments the policymaker selects targets and indicators, identiﬁes data sources, and assigns data collection Recommendation #1: Formally adopt EBP roles and responsibilities. Where multiple entities and prioritize completion of evidence collection are involved, a central entity typically coordinates The UN recognized early in the multi-stakeholder and oversees the process by creating ex ante negotiations led to the 2030 Agenda that ‘‘good protocols, manuals, and training materials to guide quality, veriﬁable evidence on progress toward collection, and by ex post cleaning, merging, and achieving the 2030 Agenda’’ would be necessary, analyzing the submitted data. The last step is the together with a formal monitoring and evaluation generation and dissemination of the results. mechanism to ensure accountability and bench- Evidence collection occurs early in the EBP mark country progress (MacFeely, 2019b: 3). Imple- process. Why, in May 2020, 5 years after the SDGs mentation of the 2030 Agenda was to be based on were launched, are UN agencies and Member States ‘‘sound evidence and science, taking advantage of still in the evidence-gathering stage for SDG 5 ? contemporary approaches from the sustainability The slow progress appears to have multiple causes. sciences including systems thinking and analysis UN Women (2018: 54) lists three problems: the and quantitative modelling’’ (Allen, Metternicht, & uneven coverage of gender indicators across goals Wiedmann, 2018: 1454). Thus, the United Nations and targets, the absence of internationally agreed in 2015 implicitly, if not explicitly, recognized the standards for data collection, and the uneven importance of evidence and made a commitment availability of gender statistics across countries to an EBP process for the 2030 Agenda. and over time. The existing gender inequality Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff indexes, the GII and GGGI, were not closely tied to The UN has worked for many years to ensure the broader targets and indicators of SDG 5 so new independence and impartiality of ofﬁcial statistics indexes had to be created; data collection for the through the UN Fundamental Principles of Ofﬁcial new metrics has been hampered by lack of estab- Statistics and UN Statistical Quality Assurance lished methodologies for collecting and measuring Frameworks (UN-SQAF, 2018). Only ofﬁcial or the indicators. accredited statistical agencies that supply ofﬁcial A second reason why SDG 5 is still in the statistics are currently acceptable sources of data for evidence collection phase is that national govern- the SDG indicators (MacFeely & Nastav, 2019). ments have failed to mainstream gender by not Imagine a 2 9 2 matrix with Agency (ofﬁcial/ prioritizing gender statistics and/or by having weak accredited vs. non-ofﬁcial/non-accredited) on one and under-resourced statistical agencies (Thomas, side and Data Source (ofﬁcial/accredited vs. non- Cordova Novion, de Haan, de Leo ´ n, Forest, & Iyer, ofﬁcial/non-accredited) on the other side. The UN’s 2018; UN, 2016; UN Women, 2018). Resource current rules and procedures limit evidence collec- constraints on statistical agencies are likely to be tion for the SDGs to only one of the four cells in the even more important given the coronavirus pan- 2 9 2 box: ofﬁcial/accredited agencies and ofﬁcial/ demic and the global recession now underway. accredited data sources. Given that the lack of data A third causal factor is that selection and measure- for many SDG indicators has slowed down com- ment of targets and indicators becomes a political pletion of the data collection stage, we support activity when WPs are involved (Fukuda-Parr & proposals to – carefully – open up and include McNeill, 2018). Politics can affect evidence collection agencies and data sources in the other cells of the in terms of, for example, determining priorities 2 9 2 matrix. within complex targets, handling country composi- We recommend that UN statistical agencies tion changes over time, deciding which entities should push forward rapidly on expanding their (national or international) are responsible for provid- partnering to include non-ofﬁcial partners, as ing data, and allocating the ﬁnancial costs of mea- argued in MacFeely (2019b) and MacFeely and surement (MacFeely, 2019b). Governments may also Nastav (2019). UN Women could, for example, be unwilling to collect and provide gender-related build on the unrealized potential in DATA2x, the data to an international agency, especially govern- collaborative technical and advocacy platform at ments with poor records on gender equality, which https://data2x.org/, which is estimating gaps in may prefer to hide or tamper with their statistics, gender data, ﬁnding potential sources, and col- fearing the reputational risks (UN Women, 2018). lecting data (Buvinic & Levine, 2015; Buvinic et al., Our assessment is that SDG 5 needs more 2014). momentum. The evidence collection phase needs We also support recent proposals that unofﬁcial completion and the process needs to move forward data and statistics, both national and international, on other steps in the EBP process. We therefore be certiﬁed and used as sources (MacFeely, 2019a; recommend that the UN and UN Women ﬁrst MacFeely & Nastav, 2019). Expansion of accept- commit explicitly and publicly to an EBP approach able data metrics is particularly important for to SDG 5 and, second, prioritize completion of the developing countries where policy capacity and evidence collection phase. The symbolic effect of a resources are limited. ‘‘Big data’’ could prove to be a formal restatement of commitment to EBP we more cost-effective, efﬁcient, and ﬁne-grained data believe would be useful for all stakeholders in the source than ofﬁcial sources and of better quality process. The commitment would also raise aware- than survey data (MacFeely, 2019a). For example, ness among stakeholders of the need to set up DATA2x provides several fascinating case studies of formal milestones and to prioritize completion of gender inequalities, which were done using big the evidence collection phase in the EBP process. data in developing countries (DATA2x, 2017, 2019). Recommendation #2: Expand the role of partnering In order to expand partnering in terms of agen- in evidence collection cies and data sources, the UN and its statistical Our second policy recommendation is that the UN agencies will need to be more open to using and UN Women expand their partnering arrange- unofﬁcial routes for SDG indicators (MacFeely, ments so they can move faster on the evidence 2019a; MacFeely & Nastav, 74). We therefore also collection phase for SDG 5. We recommend expan- sion both in terms of partners and data sources. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff support a rapid certiﬁcation process whereby unof- address the complexity and conﬂict inherent in ﬁcial agencies and data sources can be accepted by WPs. Our modiﬁcation contends that PPPs can also the UN speciﬁcally for the SDG indicators. bring together ‘‘three lenses’’ on evidence: scientiﬁc (academics, scientists), political (government poli- Recommendation #3: Build public–private cymakers and bureaucrats), and practical imple- partnerships for the long-term stages of EBP mentation (MNEs) knowledge, to deal with the WP Generating high-quality good evidence for SDG 5 is of SDG 5. We explore this idea below. only the ﬁrst step in the EBP process. Governments must also mobilize and allocate resources to the Policy Recommendations for Multinational achievement of gender equality. This means prior- Enterprises itizing gender-responsive investments, policies, and Recommendation #1: Commit to a global corporate programs. Implementation, monitoring, and social responsibility strategy accountability are also needed. These next steps How MNE executives view the role of business in in the EBP process are likely to be very difﬁcult for society has changed signiﬁcantly over the years the UN and its Member States, for at least three (Bull & Miklian, 2019; Eden, 2020). Deﬁnitions of reasons. First, short-run dislocation costs caused by social issues and corporate social responsibility the COVID-19 pandemic and global recession will (CSR) have broadened signiﬁcantly as the social make it difﬁcult for governments to prioritize and responsibility of business has evolved from its fund gender equality initiatives. A second, longer- historical goal of ‘‘do no harm’’ to the more activist term reason is that the SDGs are a goal-based role of ‘‘doing good.’’ More recently, CSR scholars institution built on soft international law with little have found that MNEs, in particular the largest to no enforceability. ‘‘As a non-binding political ones are moving from ‘‘doing good’’ to ‘‘going commitment, the 2030 Agenda lacks enforceability. above and beyond’’ mandated levels of government There are no deﬁned consequences if countries fail social policies (Eden, 2020; Schlegelmilch & Szocs, to make serious efforts to meet the goals and 2020). Simply meeting government CSR regula- targets’’ (UN Women, 2018: 257). The third reason tions is no longer viewed as a differentiating factor; is simply that SDG 5 is a WP where politics may MNEs must exceed mandated levels of social and trump evidence. environmental activities to build a reputation and How can national governments move forward on positively affect their ﬁnancial performance (Miller, the policy implementation, monitoring, and eval- Eden, & Li, 2020). uation stages of the EBP cycle to address the WP of The 2030 Agenda provides an opportunity for SDG 5? We argue that a key requirement will be MNE executives to rethink their CSR strategies. We that governments build successful partnerships recommend that MNE executives shift from view- with other stakeholders, in particular with multi- ing CSR as a stand-alone activity located in their national enterprises. Public–private partnerships marketing departments to recognizing that CSR is (PPPs) with MNEs will be critical, for example, in an activity that can and should be linked strategi- developing and implementing ﬁrm-level policies cally and dynamically to the MNE’s overall global for gender equality and empowerment of women in strategy (Eden, 2020; Schlegelmilch & Szo ¨ cs, 2020). the workplace. Potential beneﬁts from partnering This new role should include building a commit- with other stakeholders include knowledge-sharing ment to global CSR into the MNE’s goals, scope, and capacity building, mobilization of resources, rules of engagement, capabilities, and management and achievement of joint goals through collabora- systems. Making a commitment to at least 1 of the tion (Bull & McNeill, 2019). 17 SDGs should be a core component of the global Our commitment to PPPs as a solution to the corporate social strategy for every MNE. ‘‘evidence using’’ stages of an EBP approach to the 2030 Agenda builds on the three evidence ‘‘lenses’’ Recommendation #2: Build public–private in Head (2008): scientiﬁc knowledge (the research- partnerships for the 2030 Agenda based knowledge of specialists), political knowledge The 2030 Agenda is a new form of global gover- (the know-how, analysis and judgment of political nance by goal setting (van Zanten & van Tulder, actors), and practical implementation knowledge 2018; Bull & McNeill, 2019). The agenda offers an (the wisdom and practices of government bureau- opportunity for MNEs to use PPPs as a vehicle for crats). Head (2008) argues that viewing evidence solidifying a new role for business in society. MNEs, more broadly as three lenses can help policymakers Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff especially large MNEs with a global footprint, can Agenda. Given that the SDGs are voluntary goals be proactive agents of change that can serve society without formal binding commitments or penalties, and address global problems (Kolk, Kourula, & each MNE has the ﬂexibility to select from among Pisani, 2017; van Tulder, 2018). We therefore the ‘‘menu’’ or ‘‘smorgasbord’’ of the 17 SDGs, recommend that MNEs work pro-actively with UN prioritizing/ignoring and spending/not spending agencies and national governments through PPPs on the SDGs’ multiple targets and indicators, as the to further the 2030 Agenda. ﬁrm’s executives so choose (van Zanten & van MNEs have been partnering with international Tulder, 2018). organizations at least as far back as 1946 when the Our proposed framework builds on the EBP International Chamber of Commerce was given policy cycle in Figure 2 with the key difference consultative status at the United Nations (Seitz, that the EBP approach is applied to MNE decision- 2019). PPPs began to play a major role in MNE–state making. We call our framework the SDG Material- relations starting in the late 1990s (Bull & McNeill, ity Matrix because a key component of the matrix is 2019). For example, over the past 20 years, the the analysis of both ex ante and ex post materiality primary forum for UN–business networking has of SDG targets to the MNE. The concept of mate- been the UN Global Compact (UNGC), initiated in riality reﬂects the impact of a decision on a ﬁrm or 1999 by UN Secretary-General Koﬁ Annan. Other actor; materiality analysis is designed to determine industry groups have also formed to support the ‘‘what really matters to company sustainability SDGs; for example, the World Business Council for performance, commitment and strategies’’ (Cal- Sustainable Development (WDCSD, 2017, 2018) abrese, Costa, Ghiron, & Menichini, 2017: 440; whose members are primarily large MNEs. Bellantuono, Pontrandolfo, & Scozzi, 2018). Mate- The 2030 Agenda provides many opportunities for riality analyses are typically carried out on an ex MNEs to work with national governments and post basis, assessing the performance of the MNE’s international NGOs. Van Zanten and van Tulder CSR activities. Here, we expand the concept to (2018: 226), in their study of MNE engagement with include both ex ante and ex post estimates of the SDGs, found that MNEs were using PPPs where materiality of SDG targets to the MNE. We argue the SDGs were complex and externally actionable, that MNE executives can use our SDG Materiality notably, SDG 1 (no poverty), SDG 2 (zero hunger), Matrix to develop their internal evidence-based and SDG 4 (quality education). While PPPs and policies, ﬁrst, for creating and disseminating good strategic alliances are costly, they enable resource evidence for the SDGs, and second, for policy collaboration and knowledge-sharing beneﬁts that design and implementation of SDG policies inside often cannot be achieved by ﬁrms on their own. their organizations. We illustrate our SDG Materi- We recommend that MNEs use PPPs especially for ality Matrix in Figure 3. Given the huge number of the evidence collection stage for the SDGs, in SDG targets and indicators, we recommend that particular for SDG 5. The UN has asked businesses SDG target selection by the MNE should be based to partner with governments and NGOs to build on four factors: Quality of evidence for the target, more robust statistical indexes for the SDGs (Busi- Salience of the target to the MNE, Actionability of ness for 2030, 2020). There will be some targets and the target by the MNE, and Ethicality of the target indicators where the private sector has better and for the MNE. more direct access to data than governments (e.g., An EBP approach starts with the requirement of SDG 5 data on wages and salaries, access to good evidence. Thus, quality – the ‘‘best available childcare and maternity leave policies, and share evidence’’ – for each SDG in terms of its targets and of women in management and leadership roles). its indicators is the ﬁrst factor in our SDG Materi- These are areas where MNEs can play a powerful ality Matrix. MNE executives should start by map- role in improving gender statistics in the evidence ping and assessing the 17 SDGs and their targets collection stage, particularly where statistical agen- and indicators, for example, by consulting the most cies are weak. recent edition of the E-Handbook on the SDGs (UNSD, 2020). Summaries of available datasets Recommendation #3: Adopt an EBP approach and questions are also provided in GRI and the to the wicked problem of the 2030 Agenda UN Global Compact (2017) and UNSD (2020). Our third recommendation is that MNEs adopt an Our second factor is the salience of the evidence EBP approach to selecting and implementing their for the MNE. We argue that salience has two own CSR strategy for engagement with the 2030 components: ﬁt and materiality. In terms of ﬁt, Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff we argue that MNE executives should prioritize regional/global, country, industry, or ﬁrm level. SDG targets based on their relevance to and ﬁt with The second component is the type of action required the MNE’s core business purpose (Szocs & Sch- by the SDG target. Addressing the target could legelmilch, 2020). The MNE’s corporate goals for require the MNE to engage in actionability through performance (market, ﬁnancial, and social) and market-based actions (e.g., new products), opera- organizational legitimacy must also be considered tional actions (e.g., processes and value chains), or (Donoher, 2017; Terpstra-Tong, 2017). The MNE regulatory actions (e.g., standard-setting) (Szo ¨ cs & should also consider existing in-house programs Schlegelmilch, 2020). The third component of (e.g., CSR activities) and how the SDG target would actionability – actors – addresses which entity or ﬁt with the MNE’s capabilities (Szo ¨ cs & Sch- entities are responsible for the actions and what legelmilch, 2020) and CSR programs (Scho ¨ nherr, roles they play. Both target scope and action type Findler, & Martinuzzi, 2017). should affect the choice of actors and roles. For The second component of salience is materiality example, if the target is actionable at the ﬁrm level, of the SDG target to the MNE. Here, we recommend the MNE can, but does not have to, move on its that MNE executives estimate the expected beneﬁts own to address the target. Targets aimed at the and costs (both private and social) from acting on industry are likely to require partnering with ﬁrms the SDG target, the likely impact on ﬁrm perfor- in the same industry. Targets at the national or mance, and in what ways the SDG target is relevant international levels are more likely to require PPPs to the MNE’s internal and external stakeholders. and alliances with NGOs. Similarly, standard-set- How, for example, would adopting the SDG target ting actions may need industry alliances or PPPs, likely affect the MNE’s exports and imports, whereas new product launches can be done inside employment, foreign direct investment (FDI), and the MNE. global value chains? Based on an assessment of ﬁt Our last factor in the SDG Materiality Matrix is and materiality, the MNE can determine which ethicality of the target, which is the level of effort SDG targets have the greatest salience. that the MNE chooses for the SDG target. Here, we Our third factor is actionability by the MNE, consider two components: the standard or norm which has three components: target scope, action embedded in the SDG target and the MNE’s choice type, and actors (we expect the three components of compliance level. First, SDG targets can be to be interdependent). The ﬁrst component is target written as either proscriptive (‘‘do not harm’’) or scope; that is, whether the target is aimed at the prescriptive (‘‘do good’’) norms or standards, which Figure 3 The SDG Materiality Matrix applied to SDG 5 SALIENCE ETHICALITY QUALITY ACTIONABILITY Gender Equality. Goals SDG 5 FIT NORM SCOPE Indicators � No Harm/Do Good � Core Bus Purpose � Regional/Global SDG 5 � Soft/Hard Law � Corporate Goals � Country Targets � Org Legitimacy � Industry SDG 1 � Performance SDG 2 �Firm � Capabilities SDG 3 � Existing Programs I 1 SDG 4 T 1 I 2 ACTION COMPLIANCE T 2 I 3 SDG 5 T 3 I 4 � Market Driven � Level � Operational SDG 6 � Symbolic � Regulatory MATERIALITY � Compliant � Substantive � Estimated Benefit/Cost � Materiality �Private ACTORS � Monitoring T 9 � Industry � Assessment I13 �MNE �Society � Reporting I14 � Parent � Performance Impact � Affiliates SDG 17 � Stakeholder Impact � Partnerships � Internal � Other MNEs � External � PPPs �NGOs Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff can also be either voluntary or mandatory. Where both in terms of ﬁt and materiality; see, for the standard is mandatory, additional issues example, Accenture (2019), Ike, Donovan, Topple involve enforceability and sanctioning. Because and Masli (2019), PwC (2016), and WBCSD (2018). the SDGs are ‘‘soft’’ law, only the ﬁrst component In terms of actionability, we recommend that (prescriptive or proscriptive behavior) is at issue MNEs should focus, ﬁrst, on the collection and here. The second component of ethicality is the dissemination of internal evidence on SDG 5 and, MNE’s chosen level of compliance with the standard: second, on designing and implementing internal below (symbolic), at (compliant), or above (sub- policies to foster gender equality. MNEs that adopt stantive) the norm (Miller et al., 2020). We also SDG 5 as one of their key social strategies need to consider the materiality of the MNE’s engagement mainstream gender in their organizations and set with the SDG target in terms of monitoring, impact up EBP management and reporting systems to assessment, and reporting to governments and ensure implementation (Thomas et al., 2018). other stakeholders (Calabrese et al., 2017; Bellan- We also recommend that the MNE’s workplace, tuono et al., 2018). Note that, while the salience for the purposes of SDG 5, be deﬁned as including factor assesses materiality on an ex ante basis, the all domestic and foreign afﬁliates. This does not ethicality factor does the same on an ex post basis. imply that the exact same gender equality policies The four factors in our SDG Materiality Matrix for must apply throughout the MNE group on a MNE engagement with the SDGs have their direct worldwide basis. Given the large differences across parallels in the EBP policy cycle recommended for countries in both gender inequality antecedents government policymakers. As Figure 2 shows, given and outcomes, a proactive and substantive strategy the best available evidence, policymakers should will be a difﬁcult, expensive, and contentious consult with stakeholders, interpret the evidence undertaking (Terpstra-Tong, 2017). EBP predicts for the context, select their preferred option(s), that top–down strategies based on global integra- determine the actors and their roles, implement the tion are likely to fail when ‘‘what works here does policies, and monitor and assess performance. not work there.’’ We therefore recommend a bot- tom–up, locally responsive approach. MNEs should Recommendation #4: Use the SDG materiality matrix build partnerships with key stakeholders at the to mainstream gender equality country level (e.g., employees, governments, sup- We hypothesize that MNEs will prioritize at least pliers and buyers, civil society) and use the part- some SDG 5 targets and indicators as part of their nerships to develop appropriate country-based global CSR strategy. Below, we apply the SDG gender equality policies. MNEs should also address Materiality Matrix to explore how this can be done. ‘‘missing links’’, such as second- and third-tier In terms of selecting evidence based on its suppliers that often ‘‘ﬂy below the radar’’ in (non)- quality, we argue that businesses are best placed compliance with the lead ﬁrm’s and ﬁrst-tier sup- to ‘‘make a difference’’ if they select targets that pliers’ CSR initiatives (Serdijn, Kolk, & Fransen, focus on gender equality and empowering women 2020). The commitment to mainstreaming gender in the workplace. In terms of indicators, we recom- equality throughout the MNE group should be, mend that MNEs start with the GII and GGGI initially, to ‘‘go above and beyond’’ country-level rather than the newer SDG gender indexes to assess requirements for gender equality and, in the longer and design policies for addressing the gender term, to ‘‘lift all boats’’ to the highest common inequality gaps in their organizations. As we have denominator across the MNE’s local and foreign argued above, the GII and GGGI are better mea- afﬁliates. sures (at least at present) of workplace gender Lastly, in terms of ethicality, assuming MNEs do inequalities than the newer indexes. MNEs should prioritize SDG 5, what norm should they adopt – do use metrics from the GII and GGGI to collect and no harm or do good – and what level and materi- monitor their own internal statistics on gender ality? Van Zanten and van Tulder (2018) hypoth- equality and empowerment. esized that good citizens (including MNEs) would In terms of salience, van Zanten and van Tulder be more likely to choose compliance with expected (2018: 220) report that MNE engagement with the norms. Assuming that a ‘‘do good’’ standard is more SDGs has been ‘‘particularly high’’ for SDG 5. Their costly than a ‘‘no harm’’ standard, the authors result accords with other literature on the impor- found that MNEs preferred SDG targets with ‘‘no tance and salience of gender equality to business harm’’ standards. On the other hand, if MNE executives view CSR as a socially responsible Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff contract with their stakeholders, the executives are Our paper makes several contributions to the IB more likely to choose pro-active levels of engage- literature. First, to the best of our knowledge, there ment with the SDG targets (Eden, 2020; Sch- have been no articles in Journal of International legelmilch & Szo ¨ cs, 2020). There is also empirical Business Policy (JIBP)or Journal of International evidence that MNEs that ‘‘go above and beyond’’ Business Studies (JIBS) on WPs or EBP. A keyword mandated CSR levels earn a positive reputation, search of JIBS and JIBP failed to ﬁnd a single article which positively affects ﬁrm performance (Miller on either topic. We believe both frameworks offer et al., 2020). We therefore expect MNEs to beneﬁt much value added for thinking about IB policies from positive reputation gains that come from and problems. IB theory has a long history of exceeding government mandates in terms of their adopting insights from other disciplines. We hope global CSR strategies. We therefore recommend that our work will encourage other IB scholars to that MNEs commit publicly to exceeding national use these theoretical frameworks for their own standards as they mainstream gender equality research topics. throughout their organizations. We contribute to the EBP literature by expanding Finally, adopting SDG 5 as a corporate social it in three different contexts: ﬁrst, from the single- strategy also involves dissemination to others and country (domestic) level to the multi-country level reporting standards. The most common of these are of the 2030 Agenda; second, by applying EBP to the CSR reports (Eden, 2020;Schonherr et al., 2017); problem of gender inequality; and third, by devel- other examples for how to build SDG 5 activities oping a EBP for multinational enterprises in our into corporate reports can be found in GRI and new SDG Materiality Matrix. In addition, we con- UNGC (2018). In addition, MNE CEOs are now tribute to the WP literature by applying it to SDG being asked to publicly sign and post the seven gender equality, building on O’Brien et al. (2017). Women’s Empowerment Principles, designed to We also bring together two literatures – WPs and mainstream gender in business organizations (UN EBP – that historically have had little to do with Women, 2019). When CEOs of large MNEs com- one another, and show that they can usefully mit to making gender equality a top strategic inform each other. Our work here builds on Daviter priority for their organizations, the positive signal- (2019) and Head (2019). ing effect encourages others to follow suit. The We contribute to the literature on the SDGs, and visibility of large MNEs encourages others to emu- SDG 5 in particular, by showing how high-quality late their practices, creating a bandwagon effect evidence and EBP can assist in the attainment of (Van Zanten & van Tulder, 2018: 225). We there- the 2030 Agenda. Our paper also contributes to the fore recommend that, as part of mainstreaming literature on gender equality by exploring differ- gender equality in their organizations, MNE CEOs ences between ﬁve gender inequality indexes, sign on to the seven Women’s Empowerment building on Eden and Gupta (2017), and assessing Principles. their relative appropriateness as evidence in an EBP In sum, our recommendations, drawn from the approach to SDG 5. Our paper also addresses the SDG Materiality Matrix, would mainstream gender research agenda items outlined by Witte and Dil- equality throughout the MNE group and send a yard (2017), including how government policies on strong signal to stakeholders and other MNEs. the SDGs affect MNE strategies and predict which ﬁrms will engage and how they will engage with the SDGs. CONCLUSION A key innovation in our paper is the introduction Gender equality is 1 of 17 ‘‘wicked problems’’ in the of a new EBP framework for MNEs, the SDG 2030 Agenda. The issue fulﬁlls all the criteria: Materiality Matrix, based on four factors (Quality, systemic, complexly interrelated, with material Salience, Actionability, and Ethicality), which involvement by multiple actors at multiple levels MNEs can use to select and implement policies for across multiple countries (van Tulder, 2018). There their preferred SDG targets. We also contribute to is wide recognition that better evidence is needed the CSR literature by expanding it to encompass to foster women’s voice and agency, and to meet the SDGs, applying CSR insights into our SDG the UN challenge to leave no one behind (Thomas Materiality Matrix, and developing the concepts of et al., 2018; UN Women, 2018). Our paper explores ex ante and ex post materiality. how insights from EBP can be useful for tackling Going forward, we argue that IB scholars need to the WP of SDG 5 and the 2030 Agenda. better understand how, why, and where MNEs are Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff involved in the SDG process. Our SDG Materiality Piper (2019) argues that Nicaragua’s fast rise up Matrix could be used as the framework for case the GGGI country rankings was due to the GGGI studies of MNE interactions with other SDGs. ignoring national levels of economic development; Lastly, our paper could be expanded to discuss the ‘‘if the situation is bad for both genders, but role of evidence and EBP for the SDGs from the similarly bad, the Index will report (accurately) a perspective of other organizations, such as business narrow gender gap’’ (Piper, 2019: 1395). Constan- schools and professional associations. To what tine (2017) reached a similar conclusion. Piper extent are they involved in the 2030 Agenda and (2019) also tested whether Nicaraguan women what policy processes are they adopting to ensure reported greater life satisfaction when the gender that no one is left behind and everyone’s voice is gap narrowed; once GDP growth rates were heard? accounted for, no differences between Nicaragua and other countries remained. Measures of violence against women, such as forced marriages, gender-selective abortions, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS human trafﬁcking, and sexual violence in armed This paper was ﬁrst presented at a JIBP Workshop at conﬂicts, are missing. Both indexes are silent on the Academy of International Business meetings in discriminatory laws and stereotypes pervasive in Copenhagen in June 2019. We thank the JIBP Special many countries that deter gender equality. In Issue Editors, especially Rob van Tulder, and the addition, women’s rights to economic resources, anonymous reviewers, for their thoughtful, detailed, as well as access to ownership and control over land and helpful comments on the paper. We thank Reilly and other forms of property, ﬁnancial services, Smith for her assistance with the datasets. Any inheritance, and natural resources, are typically remaining errors are the authors. absent from the indexes. A look at the indicators in the SDSN’s gender index provides some evidence on the difﬁculties of NOTES capturing ‘‘no one left behind.’’ Of the 14 target indicators for SDG 5 (i.e., 5.1.1 to 5.c.1 in Table 1), For good literature reviews, see the August 2012 the actual measures used appear to be a combina- special issue of Journal of Agricultural and Environ- tion of GII and GGGI indicators. mental Ethics introduced by Whyte and Thompson Barnat, MacFeely and Peltola (2019a, b) con- (2012), and the December 2019 special issue of ducted a principal component analysis of the GII, Policy and Society introduced by Termeer et al. GGGI, and SIGI; the indexes clustered on four (2019). components: education and women’s social condi- In an interesting test of Newman and Head tions, women’s economic and labor market partic- (2017), Peters and Tarpey (2019) surveyed research- ipation, women’s political participation, and ers on six policy problems, asking respondents to health. assess each problem’s wickedness according to the Histories and analyses of EBP can be found in, ten propositions. The respondents viewed all six as for example, Brownson, Gurney and Land (1999), having some degree of wickedness, which Nutley et al. (2003), Davies (2004), Sutcliffe and depended on complexity and conﬂict. Court (2006), Head (2010), Jayaraman and Rocholl See, for example, Hudson, Ballif-Spanvill, Capri- (2017), Saltelli and Giampietro (2017), Haskins oli and Emmett (2012), Klugman, Hanmer, Twigg, (2018), and Hewlett Foundation (2018). Hasan, McCleary Sills and Santamaria Bonilla EU (2017a) provides a useful case study of (2014), Hudson (2015), McKinsey Global Institute efforts by the European Institute for Gender Equal- (2015), and Hudson et al. (2020). ity to launch, implement, and evaluate the gender To create the index, all data are converted to mainstreaming platform. indicator ratios that are truncated at 1; scores On EBP, see, for example, Davies, Nutley and between 0 and 1 for each target are calculated Smith (2000), Sutcliffe and Court (2005), Davies using weighted averages of the individual indica- (2012), Strehlenert, Richter-Sundberg, Nystrom and tors; and the ﬁnal score is calculated as an Hasson (2015), and European Commission (2017b). unweighted average of the four targets (World Newman and Head (2017) provide mini-case Economic Forum, WEF, 2020: 17: 45–48). studies of climate change, genetically modiﬁed foods, and hydraulic fracturing. In all three cases, Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff there was abundant scientiﬁc evidence on which since ‘‘conﬂicting advice received from multiple almost all scientists agreed. Despite the evidence, donors and external advisers only provides an public policy was driven by political dynamics and incentive for playing the system and producing embedded biases. The authors conclude that good inconsistent policy formulas’’ (Bartlett, 2013:464). evidence alone cannot address wicked problems; Using EBP at the regional level is explored in rather, the cure lies in ‘‘untangling the political Lofstedt and Schlag’s (2017) account of how Euro- dynamics and values-based discourse’’ (Newman & pean governments handled the heated debate over Head, 2017: 424). whether to allow the use of the chemical Bisphenol The well-known phrase ‘‘lies, damned lies, and A in Europe; the authors concluded that policy statistics’’ also points to a broader critique of decisions were ideological, not evidence- or risk- evidence: the crisis of reproducibility, integrity, based. and legitimacy that currently plagues academic The data collection and analysis are part of the research. Ethical pitfalls bedevil academia, espe- UN Women Count Project established in 2016 to cially in research, as evidenced by growing numbers ‘‘improve the production and use of gender data of shoddy research practices, article retractions, and and help countries monitor the SDGs from a gender predatory journals (Eden et al., 2018; Nielsen, Eden, perspective’’ (Seck & Maskey, 2019: 3). & Verbeke, 2020). The crisis in science creates a UN Women (2019a: 5) estimates that socio- crisis of trust; how can policymakers trust the demographic data are missing for up to 350 million research ﬁndings when scientists themselves are people. behaving badly? The SDG indicators are classiﬁed into three The problem of weak academic-policymaker tiers: tier 1 (highest quality = established method- linkages may be changing. A recent example is ology with widely available data), tier 2 (mid- Responsible Research in Business and Management, quality = established methodology but data not a global network of business and management easily available) and tier 3 (lowest quality = no faculty that encourages research on societal issues internationally accepted methodology). As of April with practical relevance for policymakers and busi- 2019, only 44% of the SDG indicators were tier 1 nesses (Responsible Research in Business and Man- and 15% were tier 3 (MacFeely & Nastav, 2019: agement, Community, 2017). Some academic 311). associations are also setting up policy journals, The Statistics Division of the UN Department of such as the Academy of International Business’s Economic and Social Affairs maintains a list of Journal of International Business Policy, speciﬁcally to proposed changes to the SDG indicators at https:// encourage scholars to engage in scholarly policy- unstats.un.org/sdgs/iaeg-sdgs/2020-comprev/ based research. UNSC-proposal/ (last accessed 15 May 2020). 15 23 For examples, see Davies et al. (2000), Nutley See, for example, Eden (2020), Kolk (2016), et al. (2003), Mulgan (2005), Shepherd (2007), Schlegelmilch and Szo ¨ cs (2020), Scho ¨ nherr et al. Janssen and Forbes (2014), and Commission on (2017), van Tulder (2018), and van Zanten and van Evidence-Based Policymaking (2017). Tulder (2018). 16 24 A useful example of how internationally The UNGC now has more than 14,000 member endorsed EBP can fail in developing countries is ﬁrms; its members committed originally to 10 Behague, Tawiah, Rosato, Some and Morrison’s principles related to human rights, labor, the (2009) study of the conﬂict between the neonatal environment, and anti-corruption. In 2015, the and maternal health care targets in the Millennium UNGC also signed onto the 2030 Agenda and Development Goals (UN, 2015a). Developing coun- developed its own set of 10 Action Platforms to try governments were asked to collect statistics and encourage networking between businesses, govern- adopt EBP for neonatal health care, but, hampered ments, and NGOs. (https://www.unglobalcompact. by lack of policy capacity and resources, ended up org/sdgs/action-platforms). diverting resources from maternal to neonatal For example, pages 206–207 of the GRI and health care. The authors concluded that interna- UNGC (2017) Report assess which SDG 5 targets are tional norms ignored local policy needs, weakening most closely and least closely tied to business, and the beneﬁts of EBP. then provide a detailed assessment of the best The assistance of four international organiza- available indicators for each target. Detailed com- tions (the European Commission, World Bank, mentaries are provided on each SDG 5 indicator OECD, and UNDP) proved to be a mixed blessing with suggestions for gender statistics that the MNE Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff could collect itself (see GRI, and UN Global Com- systematic approach to interactions between MNEs pact, UNGC, 2017: 59–68). and UN agencies can also create risks and conﬂicts The OECD has created a new set of FDI of interest. Qualities Indicators designed to measure the The principles were developed under the WE impact of FDI on sustainable development. OECD EMPOWER program, a program funded by the (2019, Ch.5) takes a ‘‘women at work’’ approach, European Union and implemented by UN Women arguing that there are four channels through which and the International Labor Organization (https:// FDI can affect SDG 5: employment, wages, top www.weps.org/join). management positions, and entrepreneurship (see For example, at the January 2020 Davos meet- also UNCTAD, 2014). The OECD’s new FDI quali- ings of the World Economic Forum, the UNGC ties index may prove useful for tracking SDG together with SAP and Accenture announced, ‘‘SDG performance for MNEs that adopt SDG 5 as their Ambition’’, challenging its members to raise their corporate social strategy. level of commitment to the 2030 Agenda (UN There is also some evidence that MNEs may Global Compact, UNGC, 2020). choose to make a symbolic commitment to the Every scholar stands on the shoulders of earlier SDGs, or, worse, use the process to impede govern- scholars. We owe a particular debt to Robert van ment regulation by lobbying (Seitz, 2019). The Tulder for his seminal work applying insights from ‘‘scope, intent and impact of business’ involvement the WP literature to the 2030 Agenda (van Tulder, in the SDGs is often ‘‘vague and hard to measure’’, 2018). according to Abshagen, Cavazzini, Graen and Oberland (2018: 7). The lack of a common and REFERENCES Abshagen, M.-L., Cavazzini, A., Graen, L., & Obenland, W. Bartlett, W. 2013. Obstacles to evidence-based policy-making in 2018. Highjacking the SDGs? The private sector and the the EU Enlargement Countries: The case of skills policies. Social sustainable development goals. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. Policy and Administration, 47(4): 451–467. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/GPFEurope/ Behague, D., Tawiah, C., Rosato, M., Some, T., & Morrison, J. Hijacking_the_SDGs.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020. 2009. Evidence-based policy-making: The implications of Accenture. 2019. The decade to deliver: A call to business action. globally-applicable research for context-speciﬁc problem-solv- The United Nations Global Compact—Accenture Strategy CEO ing in developing countries. Social Science and Medicine, 69: Study on Sustainability 2019. United Nations Global Compact. 1539–1546. Alford, J., & Head, B. W. 2017. Wicked and less wicked Bellantuono, N., Pontrandolfo, P., & Scozzi, B. 2018. Guiding problems: A typology and a contingency framework. Policy materiality analysis for sustainability reporting: The case of the and Society, 36(3): 397–413. agri-food sector. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Allen, C., Metternicht, G., & Wiedmann, T. 2018. Initial progress Management, 18(4): 336–359. in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Best, J. 2012. Damned lies and statistics: Untangling numbers from A review of evidence from countries. Sustainability Science, 13: the media, politicians and activists. Los Angeles: University of 1453–1467. California Press. Alon, T., Doepke, M., Olmstead-Rumsey, J., & Tertilt, M. 2020. Branisa, B., Klasen, S., Ziegler, M., Drechsler, D., & Jutting, J. The impact of COVID-19 on gender equality. NBER Working 2014. The institutional basis of gender inequality: The social Paper No. 26947, April. https://www.nber.org/papers/ institutions and gender index (SIGI). Feminist Economics, 20(2): w26947. Accessed 2 July 2020. 29–64. Andrus, J. K., Jauregui, B., De Oliveira, L. H., & Ruiz Matus, C. Breuer, A., Janetschek, H., & Malerba, D. 2019. Translating 2011. Challenges to building capacity for evidence-based new sustainable development goal (SDG) interdependencies into vaccine policy in developing countries. Health Affairs, 30(6): policy advice. Sustainability, 11(April): 1–20. 1104–1112. Brownson, R. C, Gurney, J. G., & Land, G. H. 1999. Evidence- Bannink, D., & Trommel, W. 2019. Intelligent modes of based decision making in public health. Journal of Public Health imperfect governance. Policy and Society, 38(2): 198–217. Management Practice, 5(5): 86–97. Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019a. Comparing global Bull, B., & McNeill, D. 2019. From market multilateralism to gender inequality indices: How well do they measure the governance by goal setting: SDGs and the changing order of economic dimension? Journal of Sustainability Research,1: partnerships in a new global order. Business and Politics, 21(4): e190016. https://doi.org/10.20900/jsr20190016. Accessed 2 464–486. July 2020. Bull, B., & Miklian, J. 2019. Towards global business engage- Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019b. Comparing Global ment with development goals? Multilateral institutions and Gender Inequality Indices: What can they tell us about the SDGs in a changing global capitalism. Business and Politics, development? In Presented at the UN Economic Commission 21(4): 445–463. for Europe Conference of European Statisticians Work Session on Business for 2030. 2020. UN metrics and indicators for the SDGs. Gender Statistics, Neuchatel, Switzerland, 15–17 May. Work- Forging a path for business in the UN 2030 Development ing Paper No. 16. Agenda. http://www.businessfor2030.org/metrics-indicators. Barro, R. J. & Lee, J.-W. 2016.Education matters. Global schooling Accessed 2 July 2020. gains from the 19th to the 21st century, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Buvinic, M., & Levine, R. 2015. What is wrong with data on Eden, L., Lund Dean, K., & Vaaler, P. 2018. The ethical professor: women and girls? Data2x: Partnering for a gender data A practical guide to research, teaching, and professional life. New revolution. November. 8 pp. York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis. Buvinic, M., Furst-Nichols, R., & Koolwal, G. 2014. Mapping Equal Measures 2030 (EM 2030). 2019. Harnessing the power of gender data gaps, DATA2x: Partnering for a gender data data for gender equality: Introducing the 2019 EM2030 gender revolution, March. 8 pp. https://data2x.org/resourcecenter/ index. Surrey: Equal Measures 2030. mapping-gender-data-gaps/. Accessed 2 July 2020. European Commission. 2017a. 2017 Report on Equality between Calabrese, A., Costa, R., Ghiron, N. L., & Menichini, T. 2017. Women and Men in the EU. Luxembourg: Publications Ofﬁce of Materiality analysis in sustainability reporting: A method for the European Union. making it work in practice. European Journal of Sustainable European Commission. 2017b. Quality of public administration: A Development, 6(3): 439–447. toolbox for practitioners. Luxembourg: Publications Ofﬁce of Caplan, N. 1979. The two-communities theory and knowledge the European Union. utilization. American Behavioral Scientist, 22(3): 459–470. Fukuda-Parr, S. 2014. Global goals as a policy tool: Intended and Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking. 2017. The unintended consequences. Journal of Human Development and promise of evidence-based policymaking. Report of the Commis- Capabilities, 15(2–3): 118–131. sion on Evidence-Based Policymaking, September 7. Washing- Fukuda-Parr, S., & McNeill, D. 2018. Knowledge and power in ton, DC: U.S. Government. setting and measuring SDGs. Global Policy Journal, 10 (Sup- Constantine, G. 2017. Does Nicaragua match up to its global plement 1): 5–15. gender gap report ranking on women’s rights? Eye On Latin Garten, M. 2020. Coronavirus update: COVID-19 likely to cost America, November 6. https://eyeonlatinamerica.com/2014/ economy $1 trillion during 2020, says UN Trade Agency. UN 11/06/nicaragua-global-gender-gap-report-2014/. Accessed 2 News, March 9. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/03/ July 2020. 1059011. Accessed 2 July 2020. Court, J., & Young, J. 2006. Bridging research and policy in Government of Malawi. 2016. Guidelines for evidence use in international development: An analytical and practical frame- decision-making in the health sector in Malawi. Ministry of work. Development in Practice, 16(1): 85–90. Health. Crowley, K., & Head, B. 2017. The enduring challenge of GRI, and UN Global Compact. 2017. Business reporting on the ‘‘wicked problems’’: Revisiting Rittel and Webber. Policy SDGs: An analysis of the goals and targets. https://www. Science, 50: 537–547. globalreporting.org/information/SDGs/Pages/Reporting-on- Data for African Development Working Group. 2014. Delivering the-SDGs.aspx. Accessed 2 July 2020. on the data revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa. Center for Global GRI, and UN Global Compact (UNGC). 2018. Business reporting Development and African Population and Health Research on the SDGs: Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting, a Center. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/delivering-data- practical guide. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/ revolution-sub-saharan-africa-0. Accessed 2 July 2020. 5628. Accessed 2 July 2020. DATA2x. 2017. Big data and the well-being of women and girls: Hantrais, L., Lenihan, A. T., & MacGregor, S. 2015. Evidence- Applications on the social science frontier, April. https://data2x. based policy: Exploring international and interdisciplinary org/resource-center/big-data-and-the-wellbeing-of-women- insights. Contemporary Social Science: Journal of the Academy and-girls/. Accessed 2 July 2020. of Social Science 10(2): 101–113. DATA2x. 2019. Big data, big impact? Towards gender-sensitive Haskins, R. 2018. Evidence-based policy: The movement, the data systems, November. https://data2x.org/resource-center/ goals, the issues, the promise. Annals, AAPSS, 678: 8–37. big-data-report/. Accessed 2 July 2020. Head, B. W. 2008. Three lenses of evidence-based policy. The Davies, P. T. 2004. Is evidence-based government possible? Jerry Australian Journal of Public Administration, 67(1): 1–11. Lee Lecture. https://www.eldis.org/document/A18705. Head, B. W. 2010. Reconsidering evidence-based policy: Key issues and challenges. Policy and Society, 29(2): 77–94. Accessed 2 July 2020. Davies, P. T. 2012. The state of evidence-based policy evaluation Head, B. W. 2019. Forty years of wicked problems literature: and its role in policy formation. National Institute Economic Forging closer links to policy studies. Policy and Society, 38(2): Review, 219(January): R41–R52. 180–197. Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M., & Smith, P. C. 2000. What works: Head, B. W., & Alford, J. 2015. Wicked problems: Implications Evidence-based policy and practice in public services. Bristol: The for public policy and management. Administration and Society, Policy Press. 47(6): 711–739. Daviter, F. 2017. Coping, taming or solving: Alternative Hewlett Foundation. 2018. Evidence-informed policymaking strat- approaches to the governance of wicked problems. Policy egy. Global Development and Population Program, March. Studies, 38(6): 571–588. Howes, S., Betteridge, A., Sause, L., & Ugyel, L. 2017. Evidence- Daviter, F. 2019. Policy analysis in the face of complexity: What based policy making in the Tropics: Are developing countries kind of knowledge to tackle wicked problems? Public Policy different? Development Policy Centre Discussion Paper No. 59, and Administration, 34(1): 62–82. July 26. ANU Research Paper Series. Canberra, Australia: De Marchi, G., Lucertini, G., & Tsoukia ` s, A. 2016. From Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National Univer- evidence-based policy making to policy analytics. Annals of sity. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3009196. Accessed 2 July Operation Research, 236: 15–38. 2020. Donoher, W. 2017. The multinational and the legitimation of Hudson, V. 2015. Leveling the ﬁeld: A global inventory of sustainable development. Transnational Corporations, 24(3): gender equality for women. World Politics Review, September 49–60. 1. https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/16572/ Eden, L. 2020. The social responsibility of multinationals: From leveling-the-ﬁeld-a-global-inventory-of-gender-equality-for- an after-thought to center stage. In B. Schlegelmilch and I. women. Accessed 2 July 2020. Szocs (Eds.) Rethinking business responsibility in a global Hudson, V., Ballif-Spanvill, B., Caprioli, M., & Emmett, C. 2012. context—Challenges to corporate social responsibility, sustain- Sex and world peace. New York: Columbia University Press. ability and ethics. Springer Series: CSR, sustainability, ethics Hudson, V., Bowen, D. L., & Nielsen, L. 2020. The First Political and governance. Cham: Springer. Order: How sex shapes governance and national security Eden, L., & Gupta, S. F. 2017. Culture and context matter: worldwide. New York: Columbia University Press. Gender in international business and management. Cross Ike, M. Donovan, J. D., Topple, C., & Masli, E. K. 2019. The Cultural and Strategic Management, 24: 194–210. process of selecting and prioritizing corporate sustainability Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff issues: Insights for achieving the sustainable development Mulgan, G. 2005. Government, knowledge and the business of goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 236: 1–13. policy making: The potential and limits of evidence-based Janssen, T., & Forbes, S. 2014. The use of ofﬁcial statistics in policy. Evidence and Policy, 1(2): 215–226. evidence-based policymaking in New Zealand. In K. Makar, B. Nature. 2020. Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on de Sousa & R. Gould (Eds.) Sustainability in statistics education. track. Nature, 577(January 2): 7–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ Proceedings of the ninth international conference on teaching d41586-019-03907-4. Accessed 2 July 2020. statistics (ICOTS9), Flagstaff, Arizona, USA, July 2014. Voor- Newman, J., & Head, B. W. 2017. Wicked tendencies in policy burg: International Statistical Institute. iase-web.org. problems: Rethinking the distinction between social and Jayaraman, R., & Rocholl, J. 2017. Research-based policy advice technical problems. Policy and Society, 36(3): 414–429. to the G20. G20 Insights. G20 Germany 2017 Think 20 Newman, J., Cherney, A., & Head, B. W. 2016. Do policy makers Dialogue, May 29. https://www.g20-insights.org/policy_ use academic research? Reexamining the ‘‘Two Communities’’ briefs/research-based-policy-advice-g20/. Accessed 2 July theory of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 2020. 76(1): 24–32. Klugman, J., Hanmer, L., Twigg, S., Hasan, T., McCleary Sills, J., Newman, J., Cherney, A., & Head, B. W. 2017. Policy capacity & Santamaria Bonilla, A. J. 2014. Voice and agency: Empow- and evidence-based policy in the public service. Public ering women and girls for shared prosperity. Washington, DC: Management Review, 19(2): 157–174. World Bank. Ney, S., & Verweij, M. 2015. Messy institutions for messy Kolk, A. 2016. The social responsibility of international business: problems: How to generate clumsy solutions? Environment and From ethics and the environment to CSR and sustainable Planning C, 33: 1679–1696. development. Journal of World Business, 51: 23–34. Nielsen, B. B., Eden, L., & Verbeke, A. 2020. Research methods Kolk, A., Kourula, A., & Pisani, N. 2017. Multinational enter- in international business: Challenges and advances. In L. Eden, prises and the Sustainable Development Goals: What do we B. B. Nielsen & A. Verbeke (Eds.) Research methods in know and how to proceed? Transnational Corporations, 24(3): international business. JIBS Special Collections: 3–41. London: 9–32. Palgrave Macmillan. Langer, L., Tripney, J., & Gough, D. 2016. The science of using Nutley, S., Davies, H., & Walter, I. (2003). Evidence-based policy science: Researching the use of research evidence in decision- and practice: Cross-sector lessons from the United Kingdom. making. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 20: 29–48. UCL Institute of Education, University College London. O’Brien, K., Fitzsimmons, T. W., Crane, M., & Head, B. 2017. Lederer, E. M. 2020. UN chief says COVID-19 is worst crisis since Workplace gender inequality as a wicked problem: Implica- World War II. Associated Press. https://abcnews.go.com/US/ tions for research and practice. In Academy of Management wireStory/chief-covid-19-worst-crisis-world-war-ii-69905340. annual meeting proceedings, Briarcliff Manor, NY. Accessed 2 July 2020. OECD. 2017. The pursuit of gender equality: An uphill battle. Paris: Lofstedt, R., & Schlag, A. K. 2017. Looking back and going OECD. forward: What should the new European Commission do in OECD. 2018a. Development Co-operation Report 2018: Joining order to promote evidence-based policy-making? Journal of forces to leave no one behind. Paris: OECD. Risk Research, 20(11): 1359–1378. OECD. 2018b. Gender equality: Gender, institutions and devel- Lubua, E. W., & Maharaj, M. S. 2012. ICT policy and e- opment database 2009 (GID-DB). OECD Social and Welfare transparency in Tanzania. In P. Cunningham & M. Cunning- Statistics (database). https://doi.org/10.1787/f3947736-en. ham (Eds.) IST-Africa 2012 conference proceedings. IICM Accessed 2 July 2020. International Information Management Corporation. OECD. 2019. SIGI 2019 Global Report: Transforming challenges Lugo-Gil, J., Jean-Baptiste, D., & Livia Frasso Jaramillo, L. 2019. into opportunities. Paris: OECD. Use of evidence to drive decision-making in government. Oliver, K., & Cairney, P. 2019. The dos and don’ts of inﬂuencing Mathematica Policy Research, February 20, 80pp. https://www. policy: A systematic review of advice to academics. Palgrave mathematica.org/-/media/publications/pdfs/education/2019/ Communications, 5:21. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019- useofevidenceindecisionmaking.pdf. 0232-y. Accessed 2 July 2020. MacFeely, S. 2019a. The big (data) bang: Opportunities and Parkhurst, J. 2017. The politics of evidence: From evidence-based challenges for compiling SDG indicators. Global Policy, 10(1): policy to the good governance of evidence. Routledge studies in 121–133. governance and public policy. Abingdon: Routledge. MacFeely, S. 2019b. The political economy of measuring the Peace Corps. 2020. Global issues: Gender equality and women’s sustainable development goals. UNCTAD Research Paper No. empowerment. https://www.peacecorps.gov/educators/ 32. UNCTAD/SER.RP/2019/4. Geneva: United Nations. resources/global-issues-gender-equality-and-womens- MacFeely, S., & Nastav, B. 2019. ‘‘You say you want a [data] empowerment/. Accessed 2 July 2020. revolution’’: A proposal to use unofﬁcial statistics for the SDG Permanyer, I. 2013a. A critical assessment of the UNDP’s gender Global Indicator Framework. Statistical Journal of the IAOS, 35: inequality index. Feminist Economics, 19(2): 1–32. 309–327. Permanyer, I. 2013b. Are UNDP indices appropriate to capture McCall, R., & Burge, J. 2016. Untangling wicked problems. gender inequalities in Europe? Social Indicators Research, 110: Artiﬁcial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Man- 927–950. ufacturing, 30: 200–210. Peters, B. G., & Tarpey, M. 2019. Are wicked problems really so McKinsey Global Institute. 2015. The power of parity: How wicked? Perceptions of policy problems. Policy and Society, advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global 38(2): 218–236. growth, September. McKinsey Global Institute. https://www. Piper, A. 2019. An investigation into the reported closing of the mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/how- Nicaraguan gender gap. Social Indicators Research, 144: 1391– advancing-womens-equality-can-add-12-trillion-to-global- 1413. growth. Accessed 2 July 2020. PwC. 2016. Make it your business: Engaging with the sustainable Miller, S. R., Eden, L., & Li, D. 2020. CSR reputation and ﬁrm development goals. www.pwc.com/sdg. Accessed 2 July 2020. performance: A dynamic approach. Journal of Business Ethics, Rademacher, W. J. 2019. Governing-by-the-numbers/statistical 16(3): 619–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4057- governance: Reﬂections on the future of ofﬁcial statistics in a 1. Accessed 2 July 2020. digital and globalised society. Statistical Journal of the IAOS, Monaghan, M., Pawson, R., & Wicker, K. 2012. The precau- 35(4): 519–537. tionary principle and evidence-based policy. Evidence and Responsible Research in Business and Management, Community Policy, 8(2): 171–191. for (RRBM). 2017. A vision of responsible research in business Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff and management: Striving for useful and credible knowledge. Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. 2006. A toolkit for progressive policymak- Position Paper, November 22. https://rrbm.network/position- ers in developing countries. Research and policy in development paper/. Accessed 2 July 2020. programme. London: Overseas Development Institute (ODI). Richards, G. W. 2017. How research-policy partnerships can Szo ¨ cs, I., & Schlegelmilch, B. 2020. Embedding CSR in corpo- beneﬁt government: A win–win for evidence-based policy- rate strategies. In B. Schlegelmilch & I. Szocs (Eds.) Rethinking making. Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de Politiques, June: business responsibility in a global context: Challenges to corpo- 165–170. rate social responsibility, sustainability and ethics. Cham: Rittel, H. 1972. On the planning crisis: Systems analysis of the Springer. ‘First and Second Generations’. BedriktsØkonomen NR.8: 390. Termeer, C. J. A. M., & Dewulf, A. 2019. A small wins framework Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. 1973. Dilemmas in a general to overcome the evaluation paradox of governing wicked theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4: 155–169. problems. Policy and Society, 38(2): 298–314. Sachs, J., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., & Fuller, G. Termeer, C. J. A. M., Dewulf, A., & Biesbroek, R. 2019. A critical 2019. Sustainable Development Report 2019. New York: assessment of the wicked problem concept: Relevance and Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions usefulness for policy science and practice. Policy and Society, Network (SDSN). 38(2): 167–179. Saltelli, A., & Giampietro, M. 2017. What is wrong with Terpstra-Tong, J. L. Y. 2017. MNE subsidiaries’ adoption of evidence based policy, and how can it be improved? Futures, gender equality and women empowerment goal: A concep- 91: 62–71. tual framework. Transnational Corporations, 24(3): 89–102. Schlegelmilch, B., & Szo ¨ cs. I. (Eds.) 2020. Rethinking business Thomas, M., Cordova Novion, C., de Haan, A., de Leo ´ n, G., responsibility in a global context: Challenges to corporate social Forest, M., & Iyer, S. S. 2018. Gender Mainstreaming: A responsibility, sustainability and ethics. Uitgever: Springer. strategic approach. Global Solutions Journal (T20 Policy Brief), Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Teksoz, K., Durand-Delacre, D., & 1(2): 155–173. Sachs, J. D. 2017. National baselines for the Sustainable UN Economic Commission for Europe. 2019. Towards a Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dash- conceptual framework for measuring gender-in-trade in ofﬁ- boards. Nature Geosciences, 10: 547–555. https://doi.org/10. cial statistics. In Note by the United Nations Conference on Trade 1038/ngeo2985. Accessed 2 July 2020. and Development. Conference of European Statisticians, Work Scho ¨ nherr, N., Findler, F., & Martinuzzi, A. 2017. Exploring the Session on Gender Statistics. Working Paper No. 25. April 8. interface of CSR and the sustainable development goals. UN Global Compact, UNGC. 2020. SDG ambition: Scaling Transnational Corporations, 24(3): 33–42. business impact for the decade of action, January 23. https:// Scott, C. 2005. Measuring up to the measurement problem: The www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/sdg-ambition. Acces- role of statistics in evidence-based policymaking. In Proceed- sed 2 July 2020. ings of the 2005 CBMS Network meeting: 35–92. UN Statistics Division, UNSD. 2020. E-handbook on the sustain- Seck, P., & Maskey, S. 2019. Use data to take the guesswork out able development goals. New York: United Nations. https:// of policymaking. UN Women, September 24. https://data. unstats.un.org/wiki/display/SDGeHandbook/Home. Accessed unwomen.org/features/use-data-take-guesswork-out- 2 July 2020. policymaking. Accessed 2 July 2020. UN Women. 1995. Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action/ Seitz, K. 2019. A Fatal Attraction? Business engagement with the Beijing +5 Political Declaration and Outcome. New York: United 2030 Agenda, February. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https:// Nations. www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/A_Fatal_Attraction_ UN Women. 2018. Turning promises into action: Gender equality online.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020. in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York: Selin, H. 2015. The risk of UN’s Sustainable Development Goals: United Nations. Too many goals, too little focus. The Conversation, September UN Women. 2019a. Progress on the Sustainable Development 25. http://theconversation.com/the-risk-of-uns-sustainable- Goals 2019. New York: United Nations. development-goals-too-many-goals-too-little-focus-48083. UN Women. 2019b. WE EMPOWER: Responsible business conduct Accessed 2 July 2020. in G7 countries. New York: United Nations. Serdijn, M., Kolk, A., & Fransen, L. (2020). Uncovering missing UN Women and PARIS21. 2019. Assessing data and capacity links in global value chain research—And implications for gaps in gender statistics. https://paris21.org/node/3286. corporate social responsibility and international business. Accessed 2 July 2020. Critical Perspectives on International Business. https://doi.org/ UN Women. 2020. Gender equality: Women’s rights in review 10.1108/cpoib-01-2020-0002. Accessed 2 July 2020. 25 years after Beijing. New York: United Nations. Shepherd, J. 2007. The production and management of UNCTAD. 2014. Investment by TNCs and gender: Preliminary evidence for public service reform. Evidence and Policy, 3(2): assessment and way forward. Investment for Development Policy 231–251. Research Series. Geneva: UNCTAD. Sotsky, J. G., Shibuya, S., Kolovich, L., & Kebhaj, S. 2016. Trends UNCTAD. 2016. Development and globalization: Facts and in gender equality and women’s advancement. Working Paper ﬁgures. Geneva: UNCTAD. No. WP/16/21, February. Washington, DC: International UNCTAD. 2018. Better data and statistics for gender-responsive Monetary Fund. trade policy. UNCTAD Policy Brief, No. 70, October. Geneva: Strassheim, H., & Kettunen, P. 2014. When does evidence- UNCTAD. based policy turn into policy-based evidence? Conﬁgurations, UNCTAD. 2020a. COVID-19 requires gender-equal responses to contexts and mechanisms. Evidence and Policy, 10(2): 259– save economies, April 1. https://unctad.org/en/pages/ 277. newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2319. Accessed 2 July Strehlenert, H., Richter-Sundberg, L., Nystrom, M. E., & Hasson, 2020. H. 2015. Evidence-informed policy formulation and imple- UNCTAD. 2020b. UN calls for $2.5 trillion coronavirus crisis mentation: A comparative case study of two national policies package for developing countries, March 30. https://unctad. for improving health and social care in Sweden. Implementa- org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2315. tion Science. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0359-1. Accessed 2 July 2020. Accessed 2 July 2020. UNDP. 2018. Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. 2005. Evidence-Based Policymaking: What Statistical update, technical note. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/ is it? How does it work? What relevance for developing countries? default/ﬁles/hdr2018_technical_notes.pdf. Accessed 2 July London: Overseas Development Institute. 2020. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff UNDP. 2019. Human Development Report 2019: Beyond income, World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. beyond averages, beyond today: Inequalities in human develop- 2017. CEO guide to the SDGs, March 27. https://www.wbcsd. ment in the 21st century. Geneva: United Nations. org/Overview/Resources/General/CEO-Guide-to-the-SDGs. United Nations. 2005. Enhanced cooperation between the United Accessed 2 July 2020. Nations and all relevant partners, in particular the private sector. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. Report of the Secretary-General. New York: United Nations. 2018. Business and the SDGs, July 9. https://www.wbcsd.org/ United Nations. 2013. Economic and Social Council. Substantive qvl3. Accessed 2 July 2020. session of 2013. New York: United Nations. World Economic Forum, WEF. 2018. The Global Gender Gap United Nations. 2015a. The Millennium Development Goals Report, 2018. Insight Report. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Report 2015. New York: United Nations. https://www.un. World Economic Forum, WEF. 2020. The Global Gender Gap org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG% Report, 2020. Insight Report. Geneva: World Economic Forum. 202015%20rev%20(July%201).pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020. United Nations. 2015b. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. A/RES/70/1. ABOUT THE AUTHORS UN General Assembly, Seventieth Session. Agenda items 15 and 116. New York: United Nations. Lorraine Eden is Professor Emerita of Management United Nations. 2016. Integrating a gender perspective into and Research Professor of Law (joint appointment) statistics. Studies in Methods, Series F No. 111. New York: at Texas A&M University. Her current research Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division, United Nations. interests include transfer pricing and MNE strate- United Nations. 2019 Progress on the sustainable development gies in the digital economy. She was 2008–2010 goals: The gender snapshot 2019. New York: Department of Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of International Busi- Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations. United Nations. 2020. World economic situation and prospects as ness Studies and 2017–2018 President of the Acad- of mid-2020. New York: United Nations. emy of International Business. She is incoming UN-SQAF. 2018. UN Statistics quality assurance framework: Dean of the AIB Fellows for 2020–2023. Including a generic statistical quality assurance framework for a UN Agency. New York: United Nations. Van Tulder, R. 2018. Business and the sustainable development M. Fernanda Wagstaff is an Associate Professor in goals: A framework for effective corporate involvement. Rotter- the Department of Marketing and Management at dam: Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. Van Zanten, J. A., & van Tulder, R. 2018. Multinational the University of Texas at El Paso where she holds enterprises and the sustainable development goals: An insti- the Robert E. and Jacqeline Skov Professorship in tutional approach to corporate engagement. Journal of Inter- Business Ethics. She received her PhD from Texas national Business Policy, 1: 208–233. WBCSD. 2018. Reporting matters. Six years on: The state of play. A&M University. Her current research interests WBCSD 2019 Report. Geneva: WBCSD. include gender and diversity issues at work and Whyte, K. P., & Thompson, P. B. 2012. Ideas for how to take international human resource management. She is wicked problems seriously. Journal of Agricultural and Environ- mental Ethics, 25(August): 441–445. the Associate Editor of Management Research: The Witte, C., & Dilyard, J. 2017. Guest editors’ introduction to the Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management. special issue: The contribution of multinational enterprises to the Sustainable Development Goals. Transnational Corpora- tions, 24(3): 1–8. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Accepted by Rob van Tulder, Area Editor, 21 May 2020. This article has been with the authors for three revisions. Journal of International Business Policy http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of International Business Policy Pubmed Central http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/pubmed-central/evidence-based-policymaking-and-the-wicked-problem-of-sdg-5-gender-39yze97h8R

Loading next page...

References (251)

I. Epifanio, M. Ibáñez (2013)
INTEGRATING A GENDER PERSPECTIVE INTO STATISTICS
(2015)
Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management
Administration and Society, 47
R. Tulder (2018)
Business & The Sustainable Development Goals: A Framework for Effective Corporate Involvement
(2019)
Assessing data and capacity gaps in gender statistics
(Buvinic, M., & Levine, R. 2015. What is wrong with data on women and girls? Data2x: Partnering for a gender data revolution. November. 8 pp.)
Buvinic, M., & Levine, R. 2015. What is wrong with data on women and girls? Data2x: Partnering for a gender data revolution. November. 8 pp.
Buvinic, M., & Levine, R. 2015. What is wrong with data on women and girls? Data2x: Partnering for a gender data revolution. November. 8 pp., Buvinic, M., & Levine, R. 2015. What is wrong with data on women and girls? Data2x: Partnering for a gender data revolution. November. 8 pp.
B. Head (2010)
Reconsidering evidence-based policy: Key issues and challenges
Policy and Society, 29
(O’Brien, K., Fitzsimmons, T. W., Crane, M., & Head, B. 2017. Workplace gender inequality as a wicked problem: Implications for research and practice. In Academy of Management annual meeting proceedings, Briarcliff Manor, NY.)
O’Brien, K., Fitzsimmons, T. W., Crane, M., & Head, B. 2017. Workplace gender inequality as a wicked problem: Implications for research and practice. In Academy of Management annual meeting proceedings, Briarcliff Manor, NY.
O’Brien, K., Fitzsimmons, T. W., Crane, M., & Head, B. 2017. Workplace gender inequality as a wicked problem: Implications for research and practice. In Academy of Management annual meeting proceedings, Briarcliff Manor, NY., O’Brien, K., Fitzsimmons, T. W., Crane, M., & Head, B. 2017. Workplace gender inequality as a wicked problem: Implications for research and practice. In Academy of Management annual meeting proceedings, Briarcliff Manor, NY.
S. Fukuda‐Parr, D. McNeill (2019)
Knowledge and Politics in Setting and Measuring the SDG s: Introduction to Special Issue
Global Policy
A. Grasso, M. Olthof, A. Boevé, Corné Dooren, L. Lähteenmäki, I. Brouwer (2019)
Socio-Demographic Predictors of Food Waste Behavior in Denmark and Spain
Sustainability
R. Brownson, J. Gurney, G. Land (1999)
Evidence-based decision making in public health.
Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP, 5 5
and Research Professor of Law (joint appointment) at Texas A&M University
Katherine O’Brien, Terrance Fitzsimmons, Margaret Crane, B. Head (2017)
Workplace gender inequality as a Wicked Problem: Implications for research and practice
, 2017
(2020)
Rethinking Business Responsibility in a Global Context
CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance
(Constantine, G. 2017. Does Nicaragua match up to its global gender gap report ranking on women’s rights? Eye On Latin America, November 6. https://eyeonlatinamerica.com/2014/11/06/nicaragua-global-gender-gap-report-2014/. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Constantine, G. 2017. Does Nicaragua match up to its global gender gap report ranking on women’s rights? Eye On Latin America, November 6. https://eyeonlatinamerica.com/2014/11/06/nicaragua-global-gender-gap-report-2014/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Constantine, G. 2017. Does Nicaragua match up to its global gender gap report ranking on women’s rights? Eye On Latin America, November 6. https://eyeonlatinamerica.com/2014/11/06/nicaragua-global-gender-gap-report-2014/. Accessed 2 July 2020., Constantine, G. 2017. Does Nicaragua match up to its global gender gap report ranking on women’s rights? Eye On Latin America, November 6. https://eyeonlatinamerica.com/2014/11/06/nicaragua-global-gender-gap-report-2014/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. 2017. CEO guide to the SDGs, March 27. https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Resources/General/CEO-Guide-to-the-SDGs. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. 2017. CEO guide to the SDGs, March 27. https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Resources/General/CEO-Guide-to-the-SDGs. Accessed 2 July 2020.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. 2017. CEO guide to the SDGs, March 27. https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Resources/General/CEO-Guide-to-the-SDGs. Accessed 2 July 2020., World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. 2017. CEO guide to the SDGs, March 27. https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Resources/General/CEO-Guide-to-the-SDGs. Accessed 2 July 2020.
J. Klugman, L. Hanmer, S. Twigg, Tazeen Hasan, J. McCleary-Sills, Julieth Santamaria (2014)
Voice and Agency : Empowering Women and Girls for Shared Prosperity
World Bank Publications
(Government of Malawi. 2016. Guidelines for evidence use in decision-making in the health sector in Malawi. Ministry of Health.)
Government of Malawi. 2016. Guidelines for evidence use in decision-making in the health sector in Malawi. Ministry of Health.
Government of Malawi. 2016. Guidelines for evidence use in decision-making in the health sector in Malawi. Ministry of Health., Government of Malawi. 2016. Guidelines for evidence use in decision-making in the health sector in Malawi. Ministry of Health.
K. Rothschild (2016)
The Peace Corps
(2021)
Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals: The Gender Snapshot 2019
(2019)
WE EMPOWER: Responsible business conduct in G7 countries
Professor Rittel (2006)
On the Planning Crisis : Systems Analysis of the 'First an d Second Generations '
(2017)
10.1787/9789264281318-en
The pursuit of gender equality: An uphill battle
(Seck, P., & Maskey, S. 2019. Use data to take the guesswork out of policymaking. UN Women, September 24. https://data.unwomen.org/features/use-data-take-guesswork-out-policymaking. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Seck, P., & Maskey, S. 2019. Use data to take the guesswork out of policymaking. UN Women, September 24. https://data.unwomen.org/features/use-data-take-guesswork-out-policymaking. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Seck, P., & Maskey, S. 2019. Use data to take the guesswork out of policymaking. UN Women, September 24. https://data.unwomen.org/features/use-data-take-guesswork-out-policymaking. Accessed 2 July 2020., Seck, P., & Maskey, S. 2019. Use data to take the guesswork out of policymaking. UN Women, September 24. https://data.unwomen.org/features/use-data-take-guesswork-out-policymaking. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(OECD. 2018b. Gender equality: Gender, institutions and development database 2009 (GID-DB). OECD Social and Welfare Statistics (database). 10.1787/f3947736-en. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
OECD. 2018b. Gender equality: Gender, institutions and development database 2009 (GID-DB). OECD Social and Welfare Statistics (database). 10.1787/f3947736-en. Accessed 2 July 2020.
OECD. 2018b. Gender equality: Gender, institutions and development database 2009 (GID-DB). OECD Social and Welfare Statistics (database). 10.1787/f3947736-en. Accessed 2 July 2020., OECD. 2018b. Gender equality: Gender, institutions and development database 2009 (GID-DB). OECD Social and Welfare Statistics (database). 10.1787/f3947736-en. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Jane Terpstra-Tong (2017)
MNE subsidiaries’ adoption of gender equality and women empowerment goal: A conceptual framework
, 24
(2017)
CEO guide to the SDGs, March 27
(Data for African Development Working Group. 2014. Delivering on the data revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa. Center for Global Development and African Population and Health Research Center. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/delivering-data-revolution-sub-saharan-africa-0. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Data for African Development Working Group. 2014. Delivering on the data revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa. Center for Global Development and African Population and Health Research Center. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/delivering-data-revolution-sub-saharan-africa-0. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Data for African Development Working Group. 2014. Delivering on the data revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa. Center for Global Development and African Population and Health Research Center. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/delivering-data-revolution-sub-saharan-africa-0. Accessed 2 July 2020., Data for African Development Working Group. 2014. Delivering on the data revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa. Center for Global Development and African Population and Health Research Center. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/delivering-data-revolution-sub-saharan-africa-0. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(2014)
Mapping gender data gaps , DATA 2 x : Partnering for a gender data revolution
UN calls for $2.5 trillion coronavirus crisis package for developing countries
L. Hantrais, Ashley Lenihan, S. MacGregor (2015)
Evidence-based policy: exploring international and interdisciplinary insights
Contemporary Social Science, 10
(Lubua, E. W., & Maharaj, M. S. 2012. ICT policy and e-transparency in Tanzania. In P. Cunningham & M. Cunningham (Eds.) IST-Africa 2012 conference proceedings. IICM International Information Management Corporation.)
Lubua, E. W., & Maharaj, M. S. 2012. ICT policy and e-transparency in Tanzania. In P. Cunningham & M. Cunningham (Eds.) IST-Africa 2012 conference proceedings. IICM International Information Management Corporation.
Lubua, E. W., & Maharaj, M. S. 2012. ICT policy and e-transparency in Tanzania. In P. Cunningham & M. Cunningham (Eds.) IST-Africa 2012 conference proceedings. IICM International Information Management Corporation., Lubua, E. W., & Maharaj, M. S. 2012. ICT policy and e-transparency in Tanzania. In P. Cunningham & M. Cunningham (Eds.) IST-Africa 2012 conference proceedings. IICM International Information Management Corporation.
N. Butler (2019)
Book Review: The Ethical Professor: A Practical Guide to Research, Teaching and Professional Life by Lorraine Eden, Kathy Lund Eden and Paul M. Vaaler
Organization, 28
(2017)
The pursuit of gender equality: An uphill battle
G. Richards (2017)
How Research–Policy Partnerships Can Benefit Government: A Win–Win for Evidence-Based Policy-Making
Canadian Public Policy, 43
(Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking. 2017. The promise of evidence-based policymaking. Report of the Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking, September 7. Washington, DC: U.S. Government.)
Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking. 2017. The promise of evidence-based policymaking. Report of the Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking, September 7. Washington, DC: U.S. Government.
Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking. 2017. The promise of evidence-based policymaking. Report of the Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking, September 7. Washington, DC: U.S. Government., Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking. 2017. The promise of evidence-based policymaking. Report of the Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking, September 7. Washington, DC: U.S. Government.
Lorraine Eden, K. Dean, Paul Vaaler (2018)
The Ethical Professor: A Practical Guide to Research, Teaching and Professional Life
(2020)
Business for 2030
(2014)
Mapping gender data gaps, DATA2x: Partnering for a gender data revolution, March. 8 pp. https://data2x.org/resourcecenter/ mapping-gender-data-gaps
(Garten, M. 2020. Coronavirus update: COVID-19 likely to cost economy $1 trillion during 2020, says UN Trade Agency. UN News, March 9. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/03/1059011. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Garten, M. 2020. Coronavirus update: COVID-19 likely to cost economy $1 trillion during 2020, says UN Trade Agency. UN News, March 9. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/03/1059011. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Garten, M. 2020. Coronavirus update: COVID-19 likely to cost economy $1 trillion during 2020, says UN Trade Agency. UN News, March 9. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/03/1059011. Accessed 2 July 2020., Garten, M. 2020. Coronavirus update: COVID-19 likely to cost economy $1 trillion during 2020, says UN Trade Agency. UN News, March 9. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/03/1059011. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(United Nations. 2016. Integrating a gender perspective into statistics. Studies in Methods, Series F No. 111. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division, United Nations.)
United Nations. 2016. Integrating a gender perspective into statistics. Studies in Methods, Series F No. 111. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division, United Nations.
United Nations. 2016. Integrating a gender perspective into statistics. Studies in Methods, Series F No. 111. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division, United Nations., United Nations. 2016. Integrating a gender perspective into statistics. Studies in Methods, Series F No. 111. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division, United Nations.
N. Schönherr, Florian Findler, A. Martinuzzi (2017)
Exploring the interface of CSR and the Sustainable Development Goals
, 24
(2018)
Business reporting on the SDGs: Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting, a practical guide
(Lederer, E. M. 2020. UN chief says COVID-19 is worst crisis since World War II. Associated Press. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/chief-covid-19-worst-crisis-world-war-ii-69905340. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Lederer, E. M. 2020. UN chief says COVID-19 is worst crisis since World War II. Associated Press. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/chief-covid-19-worst-crisis-world-war-ii-69905340. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Lederer, E. M. 2020. UN chief says COVID-19 is worst crisis since World War II. Associated Press. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/chief-covid-19-worst-crisis-world-war-ii-69905340. Accessed 2 July 2020., Lederer, E. M. 2020. UN chief says COVID-19 is worst crisis since World War II. Associated Press. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/chief-covid-19-worst-crisis-world-war-ii-69905340. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(Nature. 2020. Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on track. Nature, 577(January 2): 7–8. 10.1038/d41586-019-03907-4. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Nature. 2020. Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on track. Nature, 577(January 2): 7–8. 10.1038/d41586-019-03907-4. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Nature. 2020. Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on track. Nature, 577(January 2): 7–8. 10.1038/d41586-019-03907-4. Accessed 2 July 2020., Nature. 2020. Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on track. Nature, 577(January 2): 7–8. 10.1038/d41586-019-03907-4. Accessed 2 July 2020.
J. Court, John Young (2006)
Bridging research and policy in international development: an analytical and practical framework
Development in Practice, 16
(Peace Corps. 2020. Global issues: Gender equality and women’s empowerment. https://www.peacecorps.gov/educators/resources/global-issues-gender-equality-and-womens-empowerment/. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Peace Corps. 2020. Global issues: Gender equality and women’s empowerment. https://www.peacecorps.gov/educators/resources/global-issues-gender-equality-and-womens-empowerment/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Peace Corps. 2020. Global issues: Gender equality and women’s empowerment. https://www.peacecorps.gov/educators/resources/global-issues-gender-equality-and-womens-empowerment/. Accessed 2 July 2020., Peace Corps. 2020. Global issues: Gender equality and women’s empowerment. https://www.peacecorps.gov/educators/resources/global-issues-gender-equality-and-womens-empowerment/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(2019)
SIGI 2019 Global Report
Social Institutions and Gender Index
(MacFeely, S. 2019b. The political economy of measuring the sustainable development goals. UNCTAD Research Paper No. 32. UNCTAD/SER.RP/2019/4. Geneva: United Nations.)
MacFeely, S. 2019b. The political economy of measuring the sustainable development goals. UNCTAD Research Paper No. 32. UNCTAD/SER.RP/2019/4. Geneva: United Nations.
MacFeely, S. 2019b. The political economy of measuring the sustainable development goals. UNCTAD Research Paper No. 32. UNCTAD/SER.RP/2019/4. Geneva: United Nations., MacFeely, S. 2019b. The political economy of measuring the sustainable development goals. UNCTAD Research Paper No. 32. UNCTAD/SER.RP/2019/4. Geneva: United Nations.
Alan Piper (2018)
An Investigation into the Reported Closing of the Nicaraguan Gender Gap
Social Indicators Research, 144
A. Kolk, A. Kourula, Niccolò Pisani (2017)
Multinational Enterprises and the Sustainable Development Goals: What Do We Know and How to Proceed?
Human Rights & the Corporation eJournal
Jan Zanten, R. Tulder (2018)
Multinational enterprises and the Sustainable Development Goals: An institutional approach to corporate engagement
Journal of International Business Policy, 1
A. Breuer, H. Janetschek, D. Malerba (2019)
Translating Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Interdependencies into Policy Advice
Sustainability
(2018)
Six years on: The state of play
(Jayaraman, R., & Rocholl, J. 2017. Research-based policy advice to the G20. G20 Insights. G20 Germany 2017 Think 20 Dialogue, May 29. https://www.g20-insights.org/policy_briefs/research-based-policy-advice-g20/. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Jayaraman, R., & Rocholl, J. 2017. Research-based policy advice to the G20. G20 Insights. G20 Germany 2017 Think 20 Dialogue, May 29. https://www.g20-insights.org/policy_briefs/research-based-policy-advice-g20/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Jayaraman, R., & Rocholl, J. 2017. Research-based policy advice to the G20. G20 Insights. G20 Germany 2017 Think 20 Dialogue, May 29. https://www.g20-insights.org/policy_briefs/research-based-policy-advice-g20/. Accessed 2 July 2020., Jayaraman, R., & Rocholl, J. 2017. Research-based policy advice to the G20. G20 Insights. G20 Germany 2017 Think 20 Dialogue, May 29. https://www.g20-insights.org/policy_briefs/research-based-policy-advice-g20/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(UNDP. 2018. Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical update, technical note.http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr2018_technical_notes.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
UNDP. 2018. Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical update, technical note.http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr2018_technical_notes.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.
UNDP. 2018. Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical update, technical note.http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr2018_technical_notes.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020., UNDP. 2018. Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical update, technical note.http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr2018_technical_notes.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Coronavirus update: COVID-19 likely to cost economy $1 trillion during 2020, says UN Trade Agency. UN News
(2016)
Development and globalization: Facts and ﬁgures
(United Nations. 2015a. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015. New York: United Nations. https://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG%202015%20rev%20(July%201).pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
United Nations. 2015a. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015. New York: United Nations. https://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG%202015%20rev%20(July%201).pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.
United Nations. 2015a. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015. New York: United Nations. https://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG%202015%20rev%20(July%201).pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020., United Nations. 2015a. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015. New York: United Nations. https://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG%202015%20rev%20(July%201).pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.
W. Radermacher (2019)
Governing-by-the-numbers/Statistical governance: Reflections on the future of official statistics in a digital and globalised society
Statistical journal of the IAOS, 35
S. Nutley, H. Davies, I. Walter (2003)
Evidence-Based Policy and Practice: Cross-Sector Lessons from the United Kingdom
Social Policy Journal of New Zealand
(Equal Measures 2030 (EM 2030). 2019. Harnessing the power of data for gender equality: Introducing the 2019 EM2030 gender index. Surrey: Equal Measures 2030.)
Equal Measures 2030 (EM 2030). 2019. Harnessing the power of data for gender equality: Introducing the 2019 EM2030 gender index. Surrey: Equal Measures 2030.
Equal Measures 2030 (EM 2030). 2019. Harnessing the power of data for gender equality: Introducing the 2019 EM2030 gender index. Surrey: Equal Measures 2030., Equal Measures 2030 (EM 2030). 2019. Harnessing the power of data for gender equality: Introducing the 2019 EM2030 gender index. Surrey: Equal Measures 2030.
J. Sachs, G. Schmidt-Traub, C. Kroll, G. Lafortune, G. Fuller (2021)
Sustainable Development Report 2020
Alan Buckingham (1996)
Statistical Update
The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America
H. Wiczyk, E. Margalioth (1993)
Fatal attraction.
Fertility and sterility, 59 5
(Rittel, H. 1972. On the planning crisis: Systems analysis of the ‘First and Second Generations’. BedriktsØkonomen NR.8: 390.)
Rittel, H. 1972. On the planning crisis: Systems analysis of the ‘First and Second Generations’. BedriktsØkonomen NR.8: 390.
Rittel, H. 1972. On the planning crisis: Systems analysis of the ‘First and Second Generations’. BedriktsØkonomen NR.8: 390., Rittel, H. 1972. On the planning crisis: Systems analysis of the ‘First and Second Generations’. BedriktsØkonomen NR.8: 390.
(Oliver, K., & Cairney, P. 2019. The dos and don’ts of influencing policy: A systematic review of advice to academics. Palgrave Communications, 5:21. 10.1057/s41599-019-0232-y. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Oliver, K., & Cairney, P. 2019. The dos and don’ts of influencing policy: A systematic review of advice to academics. Palgrave Communications, 5:21. 10.1057/s41599-019-0232-y. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Oliver, K., & Cairney, P. 2019. The dos and don’ts of influencing policy: A systematic review of advice to academics. Palgrave Communications, 5:21. 10.1057/s41599-019-0232-y. Accessed 2 July 2020., Oliver, K., & Cairney, P. 2019. The dos and don’ts of influencing policy: A systematic review of advice to academics. Palgrave Communications, 5:21. 10.1057/s41599-019-0232-y. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(2018)
Knowledge and power in setting and measuring SDGs
Global Policy Journal, 10
D. Bannink, W. Trommel (2019)
Intelligent modes of imperfect governance
Policy and Society, 38
H. Rittel, M. Webber (1973)
Dilemmas in a general theory of planning
Policy Sciences, 4
R. Haskins (2018)
Evidence-Based Policy: The Movement, the Goals, the Issues, the Promise
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 678
Mark Monaghan, R. Pawson, Kate Wicker (2012)
The Precautionary Principle and Evidence-Based Policy.
Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 8
B. Branisa, Stephan Klasen, Maria Ziegler, D. Drechsler, J. Jütting (2014)
The Institutional Basis of Gender Inequality: The Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI)
Feminist Economics, 20
(2019)
Use data to take the guesswork out of policymaking
C. Scott (2005)
Measuring Up to the Measurement Problem : The Role of Statistics in Evidence-Based Policymaking
Brunei Darussalam (2021)
Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action
US-Japan Human Rights Diplomacy Post 1945
(Scott, C. 2005. Measuring up to the measurement problem: The role of statistics in evidence-based policymaking. In Proceedings of the 2005 CBMS Network meeting: 35–92.)
Scott, C. 2005. Measuring up to the measurement problem: The role of statistics in evidence-based policymaking. In Proceedings of the 2005 CBMS Network meeting: 35–92.
Scott, C. 2005. Measuring up to the measurement problem: The role of statistics in evidence-based policymaking. In Proceedings of the 2005 CBMS Network meeting: 35–92., Scott, C. 2005. Measuring up to the measurement problem: The role of statistics in evidence-based policymaking. In Proceedings of the 2005 CBMS Network meeting: 35–92.
Andrea Saltelli, M. Giampietro (2017)
What is wrong with evidence based policy, and how can it be improved?
Futures, 91
the Department of Marketing and Management at University of Texas at El Paso where she holds E. and Jacqeline Skov Professorship in Ethics. She received her PhD from Texas
Cameron Allen, G. Metternicht, T. Wiedmann (2018)
Initial progress in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): a review of evidence from countries
Sustainability Science, 13
S. Sutcliffe, J. Court (2006)
A toolkit for progressive policymakers in developing countries.
(Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019a. Comparing global gender inequality indices: How well do they measure the economic dimension? Journal of Sustainability Research, 1: e190016. 10.20900/jsr20190016. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019a. Comparing global gender inequality indices: How well do they measure the economic dimension? Journal of Sustainability Research, 1: e190016. 10.20900/jsr20190016. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019a. Comparing global gender inequality indices: How well do they measure the economic dimension? Journal of Sustainability Research, 1: e190016. 10.20900/jsr20190016. Accessed 2 July 2020., Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019a. Comparing global gender inequality indices: How well do they measure the economic dimension? Journal of Sustainability Research, 1: e190016. 10.20900/jsr20190016. Accessed 2 July 2020.
J. Andrus, B. Jauregui, L. Oliveira, C. Matus (2011)
Challenges to building capacity for evidence-based new vaccine policy in developing countries.
Health affairs, 30 6
(2017)
Culture and context matter: Gender in international business and management
Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, 24
The risk of UN's Sustainable Development Goals: Too many goals, too little focus. The Conversation
(Responsible Research in Business and Management, Community for (RRBM). 2017. A vision of responsible research in business and management: Striving for useful and credible knowledge. Position Paper, November 22. https://rrbm.network/position-paper/. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Responsible Research in Business and Management, Community for (RRBM). 2017. A vision of responsible research in business and management: Striving for useful and credible knowledge. Position Paper, November 22. https://rrbm.network/position-paper/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Responsible Research in Business and Management, Community for (RRBM). 2017. A vision of responsible research in business and management: Striving for useful and credible knowledge. Position Paper, November 22. https://rrbm.network/position-paper/. Accessed 2 July 2020., Responsible Research in Business and Management, Community for (RRBM). 2017. A vision of responsible research in business and management: Striving for useful and credible knowledge. Position Paper, November 22. https://rrbm.network/position-paper/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(UNCTAD. 2020b. UN calls for $2.5 trillion coronavirus crisis package for developing countries, March 30. https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2315. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
UNCTAD. 2020b. UN calls for $2.5 trillion coronavirus crisis package for developing countries, March 30. https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2315. Accessed 2 July 2020.
UNCTAD. 2020b. UN calls for $2.5 trillion coronavirus crisis package for developing countries, March 30. https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2315. Accessed 2 July 2020., UNCTAD. 2020b. UN calls for $2.5 trillion coronavirus crisis package for developing countries, March 30. https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2315. Accessed 2 July 2020.
R. Barro, Jong‐Wha Lee (2015)
Education Matters: Global Schooling Gains from the 19th to the 21st Century
B. Head, J. Alford (2015)
Wicked Problems
Administration & Society, 47
Merel Serdijn, A. Kolk, L. Fransen (2020)
Uncovering Missing Links in Global Value Chain Research – And Implications for Corporate Social Responsibility and International Business
Organizations & Markets: Policies & Processes eJournal
(2019)
The decade to deliver: A call to business action
(2018)
Evidence-based policy: The movement, the goals, the issues, the promise
Annals, AAPSS, 678
(DATA2x. 2017. Big data and the well-being of women and girls: Applications on the social science frontier, April. https://data2x.org/resource-center/big-data-and-the-wellbeing-of-women-and-girls/. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
DATA2x. 2017. Big data and the well-being of women and girls: Applications on the social science frontier, April. https://data2x.org/resource-center/big-data-and-the-wellbeing-of-women-and-girls/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
DATA2x. 2017. Big data and the well-being of women and girls: Applications on the social science frontier, April. https://data2x.org/resource-center/big-data-and-the-wellbeing-of-women-and-girls/. Accessed 2 July 2020., DATA2x. 2017. Big data and the well-being of women and girls: Applications on the social science frontier, April. https://data2x.org/resource-center/big-data-and-the-wellbeing-of-women-and-girls/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(2015)
Leveling the ﬁeld: A global inventory of gender equality for women
J. Zhan, Hafiz Mirza, Noelia Garcia-Nebra, Haley Knudson, S. Bonilla, J. Clements, Chantal Dupasquier, Fulvia Farinelli, Natalia Guerra, Ariel Ivanier, J. Karl, Fiorina Mugione, E. Tuerk, S. Zarrilli (2014)
Investment by tnCs and Gender: Preliminary assessment and Way Forward
Raymond McCall, J. Burge (2016)
Untangling wicked problems
Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 30
C. Termeer, A. Dewulf (2019)
A small wins framework to overcome the evaluation paradox of governing wicked problems
Policy and Society, 38
(2020)
World Economic Situation and Prospects 2020
World Economic Situation and Prospects (WESP)
B. Bull, D. McNeill (2019)
From market multilateralism to governance by goal setting: SDGs and the changing role of partnerships in a new global order
Business and Politics, 21
B. Bull, Jason Miklian (2019)
Towards global business engagement with development goals? Multilateral institutions and the SDGs in a changing global capitalism
Business and Politics, 21
Margo Thomas, César Córdova-Novion, A. Haan, Gimena León, M. Forest, S. Iyer (2018)
Gender mainstreaming: A strategic approach
(2014)
The use of official statistics in evidence - based policymaking in New Zealand
(Serdijn, M., Kolk, A., & Fransen, L. (2020). Uncovering missing links in global value chain research—And implications for corporate social responsibility and international business. Critical Perspectives on International Business. 10.1108/cpoib-01-2020-0002. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Serdijn, M., Kolk, A., & Fransen, L. (2020). Uncovering missing links in global value chain research—And implications for corporate social responsibility and international business. Critical Perspectives on International Business. 10.1108/cpoib-01-2020-0002. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Serdijn, M., Kolk, A., & Fransen, L. (2020). Uncovering missing links in global value chain research—And implications for corporate social responsibility and international business. Critical Perspectives on International Business. 10.1108/cpoib-01-2020-0002. Accessed 2 July 2020., Serdijn, M., Kolk, A., & Fransen, L. (2020). Uncovering missing links in global value chain research—And implications for corporate social responsibility and international business. Critical Perspectives on International Business. 10.1108/cpoib-01-2020-0002. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(2017)
Multinational enterprises and the Sustainable Development Goals: What do we know and how to proceed?
Transnational Corporations, 24
N. Bellantuono, P. Pontrandolfo, B. Scozzi (2018)
Guiding materiality analysis for sustainability reporting: the case of agri-food sector
International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 18
(Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. 2006. A toolkit for progressive policymakers in developing countries. Research and policy in development programme. London: Overseas Development Institute (ODI).)
Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. 2006. A toolkit for progressive policymakers in developing countries. Research and policy in development programme. London: Overseas Development Institute (ODI).
Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. 2006. A toolkit for progressive policymakers in developing countries. Research and policy in development programme. London: Overseas Development Institute (ODI)., Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. 2006. A toolkit for progressive policymakers in developing countries. Research and policy in development programme. London: Overseas Development Institute (ODI).
Stephen Howes, Ashlee Betteridge, L. Sause, Lhawang Ugyel (2017)
Evidence-Based Policy Making in the Tropics: Are Developing Countries Different?
PSN: Public Policy (Topic)
(UN Economic Commission for Europe. 2019. Towards a conceptual framework for measuring gender-in-trade in official statistics. In Note by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Conference of European Statisticians, Work Session on Gender Statistics. Working Paper No. 25. April 8.)
UN Economic Commission for Europe. 2019. Towards a conceptual framework for measuring gender-in-trade in official statistics. In Note by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Conference of European Statisticians, Work Session on Gender Statistics. Working Paper No. 25. April 8.
UN Economic Commission for Europe. 2019. Towards a conceptual framework for measuring gender-in-trade in official statistics. In Note by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Conference of European Statisticians, Work Session on Gender Statistics. Working Paper No. 25. April 8., UN Economic Commission for Europe. 2019. Towards a conceptual framework for measuring gender-in-trade in official statistics. In Note by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Conference of European Statisticians, Work Session on Gender Statistics. Working Paper No. 25. April 8.
(UNCTAD. 2020a. COVID-19 requires gender-equal responses to save economies, April 1. https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2319. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
UNCTAD. 2020a. COVID-19 requires gender-equal responses to save economies, April 1. https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2319. Accessed 2 July 2020.
UNCTAD. 2020a. COVID-19 requires gender-equal responses to save economies, April 1. https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2319. Accessed 2 July 2020., UNCTAD. 2020a. COVID-19 requires gender-equal responses to save economies, April 1. https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2319. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Rajshri Jayaraman (2019)
Research-based policy advice to the G20
S. MacFeely, B. Nastav (2019)
“You say you want a [data] revolution”: A proposal to use unofficial statistics for the SDG Global Indicator Framework
Statistical Journal of the IAOS
(Business for 2030. 2020. UN metrics and indicators for the SDGs. Forging a path for business in the UN 2030 Development Agenda. http://www.businessfor2030.org/metrics-indicators. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Business for 2030. 2020. UN metrics and indicators for the SDGs. Forging a path for business in the UN 2030 Development Agenda. http://www.businessfor2030.org/metrics-indicators. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Business for 2030. 2020. UN metrics and indicators for the SDGs. Forging a path for business in the UN 2030 Development Agenda. http://www.businessfor2030.org/metrics-indicators. Accessed 2 July 2020., Business for 2030. 2020. UN metrics and indicators for the SDGs. Forging a path for business in the UN 2030 Development Agenda. http://www.businessfor2030.org/metrics-indicators. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(2020)
Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on track
Nature, 577
H. Davies, S. Nutley, Peter Smith (2000)
What works?Evidence-based policy and practice in public services
W. Radermacher (2021)
Governing-by-the-Numbers / Statistical Governance: Reﬂections on the Future of Ofcial Statistics in a Digital and Globalised Society
Voprosy statistiki
J. Stotsky, Sakina Shibuya, Lisa Kolovich, Suhaib Kebhaj (2016)
Trends in Gender Equality and Women's Advancement
Microeconomics: Welfare Economics & Collective Decision-Making eJournal
(2017)
2017 Report on Equality between Women and Men in the EU
(DATA2x. 2019. Big data, big impact? Towards gender-sensitive data systems, November. https://data2x.org/resource-center/big-data-report/. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
DATA2x. 2019. Big data, big impact? Towards gender-sensitive data systems, November. https://data2x.org/resource-center/big-data-report/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
DATA2x. 2019. Big data, big impact? Towards gender-sensitive data systems, November. https://data2x.org/resource-center/big-data-report/. Accessed 2 July 2020., DATA2x. 2019. Big data, big impact? Towards gender-sensitive data systems, November. https://data2x.org/resource-center/big-data-report/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
P. Davies (2012)
The State of Evidence-Based Policy Evaluation and its Role in Policy Formation
National Institute Economic Review, 219
A. Peltola, H. Clark (2019)
Comparing Global Gender Inequality Indices : What can they tell us about development ?
Ethiopia Sub-program (2009)
AFRICAN POPULATION AND HEALTH RESEARCH CENTER
(Lugo-Gil, J., Jean-Baptiste, D., & Livia Frasso Jaramillo, L. 2019. Use of evidence to drive decision-making in government. Mathematica Policy Research, February 20, 80pp. https://www.mathematica.org/-/media/publications/pdfs/education/2019/useofevidenceindecisionmaking.pdf.)
Lugo-Gil, J., Jean-Baptiste, D., & Livia Frasso Jaramillo, L. 2019. Use of evidence to drive decision-making in government. Mathematica Policy Research, February 20, 80pp. https://www.mathematica.org/-/media/publications/pdfs/education/2019/useofevidenceindecisionmaking.pdf.
Lugo-Gil, J., Jean-Baptiste, D., & Livia Frasso Jaramillo, L. 2019. Use of evidence to drive decision-making in government. Mathematica Policy Research, February 20, 80pp. https://www.mathematica.org/-/media/publications/pdfs/education/2019/useofevidenceindecisionmaking.pdf., Lugo-Gil, J., Jean-Baptiste, D., & Livia Frasso Jaramillo, L. 2019. Use of evidence to drive decision-making in government. Mathematica Policy Research, February 20, 80pp. https://www.mathematica.org/-/media/publications/pdfs/education/2019/useofevidenceindecisionmaking.pdf.
(Hewlett Foundation. 2018. Evidence-informed policymaking strategy. Global Development and Population Program, March.)
Hewlett Foundation. 2018. Evidence-informed policymaking strategy. Global Development and Population Program, March.
Hewlett Foundation. 2018. Evidence-informed policymaking strategy. Global Development and Population Program, March., Hewlett Foundation. 2018. Evidence-informed policymaking strategy. Global Development and Population Program, March.
(2019)
The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2019
The Sustainable Development Goals Report
(2018)
Development Co-operation Report 2018
Development Co-operation Report
(2020)
10.18356/90ff6c86-en
Gender equality: Women’s rights in review 25 years after Beijing
A. Calabrese, R. Costa, N. Ghiron, T. Menichini (2017)
Materiality Analysis in Sustainability Reporting: A Method for Making it Work in Practice
European Journal of Sustainable Development, 6
J. Newman, Adrian Cherney, B. Head (2017)
Policy capacity and evidence-based policy in the public service
Public Management Review, 19
W. Bartlett (2013)
Obstacles to evidence-based policy-making in the EU enlargement countries: the case of skills policies
Social Policy & Administration, 47
(WBCSD. 2018. Reporting matters. Six years on: The state of play. WBCSD 2019 Report. Geneva: WBCSD.)
WBCSD. 2018. Reporting matters. Six years on: The state of play. WBCSD 2019 Report. Geneva: WBCSD.
WBCSD. 2018. Reporting matters. Six years on: The state of play. WBCSD 2019 Report. Geneva: WBCSD., WBCSD. 2018. Reporting matters. Six years on: The state of play. WBCSD 2019 Report. Geneva: WBCSD.
B. Head (2018)
Forty years of wicked problems literature: forging closer links to policy studies
Policy and Society, 38
S. Ney, M. Verweij (2015)
Messy institutions for wicked problems: How to generate clumsy solutions?
Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 33
J. Newman, B. Head (2017)
Wicked tendencies in policy problems: rethinking the distinction between social and technical problems
Policy and Society, 36
Nour Barnat, S. MacFeely, A. Peltola (2019)
Comparing Global Gender Inequality Indices: How Well Do They Measure the Economic Dimension?
Journal of Sustainability Research
Jonathan Woetzel (2015)
The Power of Parity: How Advancing Women's Equality can Add $12 trillion to Global Growth
Falk Daviter (2019)
Policy analysis in the face of complexity: What kind of knowledge to tackle wicked problems?
Public Policy and Administration, 34
William Donoher (2017)
The multinational and the legitimation of sustainable development
, 24
Fernanda Alberto, M. Guerreiro (2020)
World Business Council for Sustainable Development
Encyclopedia of Sustainable Management
B. Nielsen, Lorraine Eden, A. Verbeke (2019)
Research Methods in International Business: Challenges and Advances
B. Head (2008)
Three lenses of evidence-based policy
Australian Journal of Public Administration, 67
(United Nations. 2015b. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. A/RES/70/1. UN General Assembly, Seventieth Session. Agenda items 15 and 116. New York: United Nations.)
United Nations. 2015b. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. A/RES/70/1. UN General Assembly, Seventieth Session. Agenda items 15 and 116. New York: United Nations.
United Nations. 2015b. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. A/RES/70/1. UN General Assembly, Seventieth Session. Agenda items 15 and 116. New York: United Nations., United Nations. 2015b. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. A/RES/70/1. UN General Assembly, Seventieth Session. Agenda items 15 and 116. New York: United Nations.
(Strehlenert, H., Richter-Sundberg, L., Nystrom, M. E., & Hasson, H. 2015. Evidence-informed policy formulation and implementation: A comparative case study of two national policies for improving health and social care in Sweden. Implementation Science. 10.1186/s13012-015-0359-1. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Strehlenert, H., Richter-Sundberg, L., Nystrom, M. E., & Hasson, H. 2015. Evidence-informed policy formulation and implementation: A comparative case study of two national policies for improving health and social care in Sweden. Implementation Science. 10.1186/s13012-015-0359-1. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Strehlenert, H., Richter-Sundberg, L., Nystrom, M. E., & Hasson, H. 2015. Evidence-informed policy formulation and implementation: A comparative case study of two national policies for improving health and social care in Sweden. Implementation Science. 10.1186/s13012-015-0359-1. Accessed 2 July 2020., Strehlenert, H., Richter-Sundberg, L., Nystrom, M. E., & Hasson, H. 2015. Evidence-informed policy formulation and implementation: A comparative case study of two national policies for improving health and social care in Sweden. Implementation Science. 10.1186/s13012-015-0359-1. Accessed 2 July 2020.
B. Peters, Matthew Tarpey (2019)
Are wicked problems really so wicked? Perceptions of policy problems
Policy and Society, 38
R. Hausmann, L. Tyson, S. Zahidi (2011)
The global gender gap report. 2010.
(PwC. 2016. Make it your business: Engaging with the sustainable development goals. www.pwc.com/sdg. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
PwC. 2016. Make it your business: Engaging with the sustainable development goals. www.pwc.com/sdg. Accessed 2 July 2020.
PwC. 2016. Make it your business: Engaging with the sustainable development goals. www.pwc.com/sdg. Accessed 2 July 2020., PwC. 2016. Make it your business: Engaging with the sustainable development goals. www.pwc.com/sdg. Accessed 2 July 2020.
K. Whyte, P. Thompson (2012)
Ideas for How to Take Wicked Problems Seriously
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25
(2020)
SDG ambition: Scaling business impact for the decade of action , January
J. Alford, B. Head (2017)
Wicked and less wicked problems: a typology and a contingency framework
Policy and Society, 36
(McKinsey Global Institute. 2015. The power of parity: How advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global growth, September. McKinsey Global Institute. https://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/how-advancing-womens-equality-can-add-12-trillion-to-global-growth. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
McKinsey Global Institute. 2015. The power of parity: How advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global growth, September. McKinsey Global Institute. https://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/how-advancing-womens-equality-can-add-12-trillion-to-global-growth. Accessed 2 July 2020.
McKinsey Global Institute. 2015. The power of parity: How advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global growth, September. McKinsey Global Institute. https://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/how-advancing-womens-equality-can-add-12-trillion-to-global-growth. Accessed 2 July 2020., McKinsey Global Institute. 2015. The power of parity: How advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global growth, September. McKinsey Global Institute. https://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/how-advancing-womens-equality-can-add-12-trillion-to-global-growth. Accessed 2 July 2020.
D. Béhague, C. Tawiah, M. Rosato, Télesphore Somé, J. Morrison (2009)
Evidence-based policy-making: the implications of globally-applicable research for context-specific problem-solving in developing countries.
Social science & medicine, 69 10
C. Witte, J. Dilyard (2017)
Guest editors’ introduction to the special issue: The contribution of multinational enterprises to the Sustainable Development Goals
, 24
(2005)
Evidence - Based Policymaking: What is it? How does it work? What relevance for developing countries ? London: Overseas Development Institute
(UN-SQAF. 2018. UN Statistics quality assurance framework: Including a generic statistical quality assurance framework for a UN Agency. New York: United Nations.)
UN-SQAF. 2018. UN Statistics quality assurance framework: Including a generic statistical quality assurance framework for a UN Agency. New York: United Nations.
UN-SQAF. 2018. UN Statistics quality assurance framework: Including a generic statistical quality assurance framework for a UN Agency. New York: United Nations., UN-SQAF. 2018. UN Statistics quality assurance framework: Including a generic statistical quality assurance framework for a UN Agency. New York: United Nations.
(UNCTAD. 2018. Better data and statistics for gender-responsive trade policy. UNCTAD Policy Brief, No. 70, October. Geneva: UNCTAD.)
UNCTAD. 2018. Better data and statistics for gender-responsive trade policy. UNCTAD Policy Brief, No. 70, October. Geneva: UNCTAD.
UNCTAD. 2018. Better data and statistics for gender-responsive trade policy. UNCTAD Policy Brief, No. 70, October. Geneva: UNCTAD., UNCTAD. 2018. Better data and statistics for gender-responsive trade policy. UNCTAD Policy Brief, No. 70, October. Geneva: UNCTAD.
K. Oliver, P. Cairney (2019)
The dos and don’ts of influencing policy: a systematic review of advice to academics
Palgrave Communications, 5
(Seitz, K. 2019. A Fatal Attraction? Business engagement with the 2030 Agenda, February. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/A_Fatal_Attraction_online.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Seitz, K. 2019. A Fatal Attraction? Business engagement with the 2030 Agenda, February. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/A_Fatal_Attraction_online.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Seitz, K. 2019. A Fatal Attraction? Business engagement with the 2030 Agenda, February. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/A_Fatal_Attraction_online.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020., Seitz, K. 2019. A Fatal Attraction? Business engagement with the 2030 Agenda, February. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/A_Fatal_Attraction_online.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Lorraine Eden, S. Gupta (2017)
Culture and Context Matter: Gender in International Business and Management
Women & International Relations eJournal
L. Day (1989)
Education matters.
Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987), 3 15
(Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Teksoz, K., Durand-Delacre, D., & Sachs, J. D. 2017. National baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dashboards. Nature Geosciences, 10: 547–555. 10.1038/ngeo2985. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Teksoz, K., Durand-Delacre, D., & Sachs, J. D. 2017. National baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dashboards. Nature Geosciences, 10: 547–555. 10.1038/ngeo2985. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Teksoz, K., Durand-Delacre, D., & Sachs, J. D. 2017. National baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dashboards. Nature Geosciences, 10: 547–555. 10.1038/ngeo2985. Accessed 2 July 2020., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Teksoz, K., Durand-Delacre, D., & Sachs, J. D. 2017. National baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dashboards. Nature Geosciences, 10: 547–555. 10.1038/ngeo2985. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019b. Comparing Global Gender Inequality Indices: What can they tell us about development? In Presented at the UN Economic Commission for Europe Conference of European Statisticians Work Session on Gender Statistics, Neuchatel, Switzerland, 15–17 May. Working Paper No. 16.)
Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019b. Comparing Global Gender Inequality Indices: What can they tell us about development? In Presented at the UN Economic Commission for Europe Conference of European Statisticians Work Session on Gender Statistics, Neuchatel, Switzerland, 15–17 May. Working Paper No. 16.
Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019b. Comparing Global Gender Inequality Indices: What can they tell us about development? In Presented at the UN Economic Commission for Europe Conference of European Statisticians Work Session on Gender Statistics, Neuchatel, Switzerland, 15–17 May. Working Paper No. 16., Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019b. Comparing Global Gender Inequality Indices: What can they tell us about development? In Presented at the UN Economic Commission for Europe Conference of European Statisticians Work Session on Gender Statistics, Neuchatel, Switzerland, 15–17 May. Working Paper No. 16.
N. Caplan (1979)
The Two-Communities Theory and Knowledge Utilization
American Behavioral Scientist, 22
Evidence-informed policymaking strategy. Global Development and Population Program
(2018)
Human development indices and indicators: 2018 statistical update
B. Vaitla, C. Bosco, V. Alegana, Tomas Bird, C. Pezzulo, Graeme Hornby, A. Sorichetta, J. Steele, Cori Ruktanonchai, N. Ruktanonchai, Erik Wetter, Linus Bengtsson, A. Tatem, Riccardo Clemente, Miguel Luengo-Oroz, Marta González, R. Nielsen, T. Baar, Felicia Vacarelu, M. Choudhury, Sanket Sharma, T. Logar, Wouter Eekhout (2017)
Big data and the well-being of women and girls: applications on the social scientific frontier
(World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. 2018. Business and the SDGs, July 9. https://www.wbcsd.org/qvl3. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. 2018. Business and the SDGs, July 9. https://www.wbcsd.org/qvl3. Accessed 2 July 2020.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. 2018. Business and the SDGs, July 9. https://www.wbcsd.org/qvl3. Accessed 2 July 2020., World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. 2018. Business and the SDGs, July 9. https://www.wbcsd.org/qvl3. Accessed 2 July 2020.
I. Permanyer (2013)
A Critical Assessment of the UNDP’s Gender Inequality Index
Feminist Economics, 19
J. Newman, Adrian Cherney, B. Head (2016)
Do Policy Makers Use Academic Research? Reexamining the "Two Communities" Theory of Research Utilization
Public Administration Review, 76
Laurenz Langer, Janice Tripney, D. Gough (2016)
The Science of Using Science: Researching the Use of Research Evidence in Decision-Making
(2020)
. COVID-19 requires gender-equal responses to save economies, April
Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking. 2017. The promise of evidence-based policymaking
D. Hitchens, J. Clausen, K. Fichter (1998)
World Business Council for Sustainable Development - WBCSD
Business reporting on the SDGs: An analysis of the goals and targets
(2021)
Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals: The Gender Snapshot 2021
R. Lofstedt, A. Schlag (2017)
Looking back and going forward: what should the new European Commission do in order to promote evidence-based policy-making?
Journal of Risk Research, 20
G. Mulgan (2005)
Government, knowledge and the business of policy making: the potential and limits of evidence-based policy
Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 1
Make it your business: Engaging with the sustainable development goals. www.pwc.com/sdg
(UN Global Compact, UNGC. 2020. SDG ambition: Scaling business impact for the decade of action, January 23. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/sdg-ambition. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
UN Global Compact, UNGC. 2020. SDG ambition: Scaling business impact for the decade of action, January 23. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/sdg-ambition. Accessed 2 July 2020.
UN Global Compact, UNGC. 2020. SDG ambition: Scaling business impact for the decade of action, January 23. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/sdg-ambition. Accessed 2 July 2020., UN Global Compact, UNGC. 2020. SDG ambition: Scaling business impact for the decade of action, January 23. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/sdg-ambition. Accessed 2 July 2020.
R. Hausmann, L. Tyson, S. Zahidi (2006)
The global gender gap report
(2018)
Turning Promises Into Action
(Selin, H. 2015. The risk of UN’s Sustainable Development Goals: Too many goals, too little focus. The Conversation, September 25. http://theconversation.com/the-risk-of-uns-sustainable-development-goals-too-many-goals-too-little-focus-48083. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Selin, H. 2015. The risk of UN’s Sustainable Development Goals: Too many goals, too little focus. The Conversation, September 25. http://theconversation.com/the-risk-of-uns-sustainable-development-goals-too-many-goals-too-little-focus-48083. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Selin, H. 2015. The risk of UN’s Sustainable Development Goals: Too many goals, too little focus. The Conversation, September 25. http://theconversation.com/the-risk-of-uns-sustainable-development-goals-too-many-goals-too-little-focus-48083. Accessed 2 July 2020., Selin, H. 2015. The risk of UN’s Sustainable Development Goals: Too many goals, too little focus. The Conversation, September 25. http://theconversation.com/the-risk-of-uns-sustainable-development-goals-too-many-goals-too-little-focus-48083. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Iain Boyle, A. Duffy, R. Whitfield, Shaofeng Liu (2012)
Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design , Analysis and Manufacturing
L Eden, K Lund Dean, P Vaaler (2018)
10.4324/9781351049429
The ethical professor: A practical guide to research, teaching, and professional life
Holger Strassheim, Pekka Kettunen (2014)
When does evidence-based policy turn into policy-based evidence? Configurations, contexts and mechanisms
Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 10
J. Best (2001)
Damned Lies and Statistics: Untangling Numbers from the Media, Politicians, and Activists
Iris Häuser (2021)
Gender Mainstreaming
Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals
(2020)
Gender Equality
Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals
(2016)
The social responsibility of international business: From ethics and the environment to CSR and sustainable development
Journal of World Business, 51
I. Permanyer (2013)
Are UNDP Indices Appropriate to Capture Gender Inequalities in Europe?
Social Indicators Research, 110
(2004)
Is evidence - based government possible? Jerry Lee Lecture
S. Fukuda‐Parr (2014)
Global Goals as a Policy Tool: Intended and Unintended Consequences
Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 15
(2016)
Guidelines for evidence use in decision - making in the health sector in Malawi
H. Dupree, J. Andrews, R. Reagan, R. Smitherman, D. Greenland (1975)
Production and management
(Howes, S., Betteridge, A., Sause, L., & Ugyel, L. 2017. Evidence-based policy making in the Tropics: Are developing countries different? Development Policy Centre Discussion Paper No. 59, July 26. ANU Research Paper Series. Canberra, Australia: Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3009196. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Howes, S., Betteridge, A., Sause, L., & Ugyel, L. 2017. Evidence-based policy making in the Tropics: Are developing countries different? Development Policy Centre Discussion Paper No. 59, July 26. ANU Research Paper Series. Canberra, Australia: Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3009196. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Howes, S., Betteridge, A., Sause, L., & Ugyel, L. 2017. Evidence-based policy making in the Tropics: Are developing countries different? Development Policy Centre Discussion Paper No. 59, July 26. ANU Research Paper Series. Canberra, Australia: Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3009196. Accessed 2 July 2020., Howes, S., Betteridge, A., Sause, L., & Ugyel, L. 2017. Evidence-based policy making in the Tropics: Are developing countries different? Development Policy Centre Discussion Paper No. 59, July 26. ANU Research Paper Series. Canberra, Australia: Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3009196. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Falk Daviter (2017)
Coping, taming or solving: alternative approaches to the governance of wicked problems
Policy Studies, 38
(2019)
2019a. The big (data) bang: Opportunities
(2017)
Does Nicaragua match up to its global gender gap report ranking on women’s rights? Eye On Latin America, November 6
V. Hudson, D. Bowen, P. Nielsen (2020)
The First Political Order
Better data and statistics for gender-responsive trade policy
T. Alon, Matthias Doepke, Jane Olmstead-Rumsey, M. Tertilt (2020)
The Impact of Covid-19 on Gender Equality
Labor: Supply & Demand eJournal
(Davies, P. T. 2004. Is evidence-based government possible? Jerry Lee Lecture. https://www.eldis.org/document/A18705. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Davies, P. T. 2004. Is evidence-based government possible? Jerry Lee Lecture. https://www.eldis.org/document/A18705. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Davies, P. T. 2004. Is evidence-based government possible? Jerry Lee Lecture. https://www.eldis.org/document/A18705. Accessed 2 July 2020., Davies, P. T. 2004. Is evidence-based government possible? Jerry Lee Lecture. https://www.eldis.org/document/A18705. Accessed 2 July 2020.
G. Schmidt-Traub, C. Kroll, Katerina Teksoz, David Durand-Delacre, J. Sachs (2017)
National baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dashboards
Nature Geoscience, 10
(2019)
Towards a conceptual framework for measuring gender-in-trade in ofﬁ-cial statistics
(GRI, and UN Global Compact (UNGC). 2018. Business reporting on the SDGs: Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting, a practical guide.https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/5628. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
GRI, and UN Global Compact (UNGC). 2018. Business reporting on the SDGs: Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting, a practical guide.https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/5628. Accessed 2 July 2020.
GRI, and UN Global Compact (UNGC). 2018. Business reporting on the SDGs: Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting, a practical guide.https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/5628. Accessed 2 July 2020., GRI, and UN Global Compact (UNGC). 2018. Business reporting on the SDGs: Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting, a practical guide.https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/5628. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(Buvinic, M., Furst-Nichols, R., & Koolwal, G. 2014. Mapping gender data gaps, DATA2x: Partnering for a gender data revolution, March. 8 pp. https://data2x.org/resourcecenter/mapping-gender-data-gaps/. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Buvinic, M., Furst-Nichols, R., & Koolwal, G. 2014. Mapping gender data gaps, DATA2x: Partnering for a gender data revolution, March. 8 pp. https://data2x.org/resourcecenter/mapping-gender-data-gaps/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Buvinic, M., Furst-Nichols, R., & Koolwal, G. 2014. Mapping gender data gaps, DATA2x: Partnering for a gender data revolution, March. 8 pp. https://data2x.org/resourcecenter/mapping-gender-data-gaps/. Accessed 2 July 2020., Buvinic, M., Furst-Nichols, R., & Koolwal, G. 2014. Mapping gender data gaps, DATA2x: Partnering for a gender data revolution, March. 8 pp. https://data2x.org/resourcecenter/mapping-gender-data-gaps/. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(GRI, and UN Global Compact. 2017. Business reporting on the SDGs: An analysis of the goals and targets.https://www.globalreporting.org/information/SDGs/Pages/Reporting-on-the-SDGs.aspx. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
GRI, and UN Global Compact. 2017. Business reporting on the SDGs: An analysis of the goals and targets.https://www.globalreporting.org/information/SDGs/Pages/Reporting-on-the-SDGs.aspx. Accessed 2 July 2020.
GRI, and UN Global Compact. 2017. Business reporting on the SDGs: An analysis of the goals and targets.https://www.globalreporting.org/information/SDGs/Pages/Reporting-on-the-SDGs.aspx. Accessed 2 July 2020., GRI, and UN Global Compact. 2017. Business reporting on the SDGs: An analysis of the goals and targets.https://www.globalreporting.org/information/SDGs/Pages/Reporting-on-the-SDGs.aspx. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(2018)
Joining forces to leave no one behind
Accessed 2
(Abshagen, M.-L., Cavazzini, A., Graen, L., & Obenland, W. 2018. Highjacking the SDGs? The private sector and the sustainable development goals. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/GPFEurope/Hijacking_the_SDGs.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Abshagen, M.-L., Cavazzini, A., Graen, L., & Obenland, W. 2018. Highjacking the SDGs? The private sector and the sustainable development goals. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/GPFEurope/Hijacking_the_SDGs.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Abshagen, M.-L., Cavazzini, A., Graen, L., & Obenland, W. 2018. Highjacking the SDGs? The private sector and the sustainable development goals. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/GPFEurope/Hijacking_the_SDGs.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020., Abshagen, M.-L., Cavazzini, A., Graen, L., & Obenland, W. 2018. Highjacking the SDGs? The private sector and the sustainable development goals. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/GPFEurope/Hijacking_the_SDGs.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020.
P. McKiernan (2016)
A Vision of Responsible Research in Business and Management: Striving for Credible and Useful Knowledge
Stewart Miller, Lorraine Eden, Dan Li (2018)
CSR Reputation and Firm Performance: A Dynamic Approach
Journal of Business Ethics, 163
(2019)
2019b. The political economy of measuring
(2018)
UN Statistics quality assurance framework: Including a generic statistical quality assurance framework for a UN Agency
J. Best (2012)
Damned Lies And Statistics
(2018)
Gender equality: Gender, institutions and development database 2009 (GID-DB)
(2019)
Human Development Report 2019: Beyond income, beyond averages, beyond today: Inequalities in human development in the 21st century
(2012)
ICT policy and etransparency in Tanzania
Contributions Walpole (2008)
The Millennium Development Goals Report
, 2008
(UN Statistics Division, UNSD. 2020. E-handbook on the sustainable development goals. New York: United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/wiki/display/SDGeHandbook/Home. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
UN Statistics Division, UNSD. 2020. E-handbook on the sustainable development goals. New York: United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/wiki/display/SDGeHandbook/Home. Accessed 2 July 2020.
UN Statistics Division, UNSD. 2020. E-handbook on the sustainable development goals. New York: United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/wiki/display/SDGeHandbook/Home. Accessed 2 July 2020., UN Statistics Division, UNSD. 2020. E-handbook on the sustainable development goals. New York: United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/wiki/display/SDGeHandbook/Home. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(2015)
What is wrong with data on women and girls ?
(Hudson, V. 2015. Leveling the field: A global inventory of gender equality for women. World Politics Review, September 1. https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/16572/leveling-the-field-a-global-inventory-of-gender-equality-for-women. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Hudson, V. 2015. Leveling the field: A global inventory of gender equality for women. World Politics Review, September 1. https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/16572/leveling-the-field-a-global-inventory-of-gender-equality-for-women. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Hudson, V. 2015. Leveling the field: A global inventory of gender equality for women. World Politics Review, September 1. https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/16572/leveling-the-field-a-global-inventory-of-gender-equality-for-women. Accessed 2 July 2020., Hudson, V. 2015. Leveling the field: A global inventory of gender equality for women. World Politics Review, September 1. https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/16572/leveling-the-field-a-global-inventory-of-gender-equality-for-women. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(2017)
Quality of public administration: A toolbox for practitioners
(Janssen, T., & Forbes, S. 2014. The use of official statistics in evidence-based policymaking in New Zealand. In K. Makar, B. de Sousa & R. Gould (Eds.) Sustainability in statistics education. Proceedings of the ninth international conference on teaching statistics (ICOTS9), Flagstaff, Arizona, USA, July 2014. Voorburg: International Statistical Institute. iase-web.org.)
Janssen, T., & Forbes, S. 2014. The use of official statistics in evidence-based policymaking in New Zealand. In K. Makar, B. de Sousa & R. Gould (Eds.) Sustainability in statistics education. Proceedings of the ninth international conference on teaching statistics (ICOTS9), Flagstaff, Arizona, USA, July 2014. Voorburg: International Statistical Institute. iase-web.org.
Janssen, T., & Forbes, S. 2014. The use of official statistics in evidence-based policymaking in New Zealand. In K. Makar, B. de Sousa & R. Gould (Eds.) Sustainability in statistics education. Proceedings of the ninth international conference on teaching statistics (ICOTS9), Flagstaff, Arizona, USA, July 2014. Voorburg: International Statistical Institute. iase-web.org., Janssen, T., & Forbes, S. 2014. The use of official statistics in evidence-based policymaking in New Zealand. In K. Makar, B. de Sousa & R. Gould (Eds.) Sustainability in statistics education. Proceedings of the ninth international conference on teaching statistics (ICOTS9), Flagstaff, Arizona, USA, July 2014. Voorburg: International Statistical Institute. iase-web.org.
M. Ike, J. Donovan, Cheree Topple, E. Masli (2019)
The process of selecting and prioritising corporate sustainability issues: Insights for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals
Journal of Cleaner Production
V. Hudson (2012)
Sex and World Peace
J. Shepherd (2007)
The production and management of evidence for public service reform
Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 3
S. MacFeely (2019)
The Big (data) Bang: Opportunities and Challenges for CompilingSDGIndicators
Global Policy
Un Desa (2016)
Transforming our world : The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
(2019)
Harnessing the power of data for gender equality: Introducing the 2019 EM2030 gender index
Giada Marchi, Giulia Lucertini, A. Tsoukiás (2016)
From evidence-based policy making to policy analytics
Annals of Operations Research, 236
(1957)
Economic and Social Council
International Organization, 11
Mike Peng, S. Sun, Dane Blevins (2011)
The social responsibility of international business scholars
The Multinational Business Review, 19
(2019)
Equal Measures 2030 (EM 2030)
(2019)
Big data, big impact? Towards gender - sensitive data systems
(2005)
Enhanced cooperation between the United Nations and all relevant partners, in particular the private sector
(Richards, G. W. 2017. How research-policy partnerships can benefit government: A win–win for evidence-based policy-making. Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de Politiques, June: 165–170.)
Richards, G. W. 2017. How research-policy partnerships can benefit government: A win–win for evidence-based policy-making. Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de Politiques, June: 165–170.
Richards, G. W. 2017. How research-policy partnerships can benefit government: A win–win for evidence-based policy-making. Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de Politiques, June: 165–170., Richards, G. W. 2017. How research-policy partnerships can benefit government: A win–win for evidence-based policy-making. Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de Politiques, June: 165–170.
(2020)
World Economic Situation and Prospects as of mid-2020
World Economic Situation and Prospects 2020
C. Termeer, A. Dewulf, R. Biesbroek (2019)
A critical assessment of the wicked problem concept: relevance and usefulness for policy science and practice
Policy and Society, 38
(Thomas, M., Cordova Novion, C., de Haan, A., de León, G., Forest, M., & Iyer, S. S. 2018. Gender Mainstreaming: A strategic approach. Global Solutions Journal (T20 Policy Brief), 1(2): 155–173.)
Thomas, M., Cordova Novion, C., de Haan, A., de León, G., Forest, M., & Iyer, S. S. 2018. Gender Mainstreaming: A strategic approach. Global Solutions Journal (T20 Policy Brief), 1(2): 155–173.
Thomas, M., Cordova Novion, C., de Haan, A., de León, G., Forest, M., & Iyer, S. S. 2018. Gender Mainstreaming: A strategic approach. Global Solutions Journal (T20 Policy Brief), 1(2): 155–173., Thomas, M., Cordova Novion, C., de Haan, A., de León, G., Forest, M., & Iyer, S. S. 2018. Gender Mainstreaming: A strategic approach. Global Solutions Journal (T20 Policy Brief), 1(2): 155–173.
Lorraine Eden (2020)
The Social Responsibility of Multinationals: From an Afterthought to Center Stage
(Accenture. 2019. The decade to deliver: A call to business action. The United Nations Global Compact—Accenture Strategy CEO Study on Sustainability 2019. United Nations Global Compact.)
Accenture. 2019. The decade to deliver: A call to business action. The United Nations Global Compact—Accenture Strategy CEO Study on Sustainability 2019. United Nations Global Compact.
Accenture. 2019. The decade to deliver: A call to business action. The United Nations Global Compact—Accenture Strategy CEO Study on Sustainability 2019. United Nations Global Compact., Accenture. 2019. The decade to deliver: A call to business action. The United Nations Global Compact—Accenture Strategy CEO Study on Sustainability 2019. United Nations Global Compact.
J. Parkhurst (2016)
The politics of evidence: from evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence
(Alon, T., Doepke, M., Olmstead-Rumsey, J., & Tertilt, M. 2020. The impact of COVID-19 on gender equality. NBER Working Paper No. 26947, April. https://www.nber.org/papers/w26947. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Alon, T., Doepke, M., Olmstead-Rumsey, J., & Tertilt, M. 2020. The impact of COVID-19 on gender equality. NBER Working Paper No. 26947, April. https://www.nber.org/papers/w26947. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Alon, T., Doepke, M., Olmstead-Rumsey, J., & Tertilt, M. 2020. The impact of COVID-19 on gender equality. NBER Working Paper No. 26947, April. https://www.nber.org/papers/w26947. Accessed 2 July 2020., Alon, T., Doepke, M., Olmstead-Rumsey, J., & Tertilt, M. 2020. The impact of COVID-19 on gender equality. NBER Working Paper No. 26947, April. https://www.nber.org/papers/w26947. Accessed 2 July 2020.
(UN Women and PARIS21. 2019. Assessing data and capacity gaps in gender statistics.https://paris21.org/node/3286. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
UN Women and PARIS21. 2019. Assessing data and capacity gaps in gender statistics.https://paris21.org/node/3286. Accessed 2 July 2020.
UN Women and PARIS21. 2019. Assessing data and capacity gaps in gender statistics.https://paris21.org/node/3286. Accessed 2 July 2020., UN Women and PARIS21. 2019. Assessing data and capacity gaps in gender statistics.https://paris21.org/node/3286. Accessed 2 July 2020.
K. Crowley, B. Head (2017)
The enduring challenge of ‘wicked problems’: revisiting Rittel and Webber
Policy Sciences, 50
Helena Strehlenert, Linda Richter-Sundberg, Linda Richter-Sundberg, M. Nyström, M. Nyström, H. Hasson, H. Hasson (2015)
Evidence-informed policy formulation and implementation: a comparative case study of two national policies for improving health and social care in Sweden
Implementation Science : IS, 10
Ilona Szőcs, B. Schlegelmilch (2020)
Embedding CSR in Corporate Strategies
(Sotsky, J. G., Shibuya, S., Kolovich, L., & Kebhaj, S. 2016. Trends in gender equality and women’s advancement. Working Paper No. WP/16/21, February. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.)
Sotsky, J. G., Shibuya, S., Kolovich, L., & Kebhaj, S. 2016. Trends in gender equality and women’s advancement. Working Paper No. WP/16/21, February. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
Sotsky, J. G., Shibuya, S., Kolovich, L., & Kebhaj, S. 2016. Trends in gender equality and women’s advancement. Working Paper No. WP/16/21, February. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund., Sotsky, J. G., Shibuya, S., Kolovich, L., & Kebhaj, S. 2016. Trends in gender equality and women’s advancement. Working Paper No. WP/16/21, February. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
HTO Davies, SM Nutley, PC Smith (2000)
10.46692/9781847425119
What works: Evidence-based policy and practice in public services
(2020)
UN chief says COVID - 19 is worst crisis since World War II
L. Fagerlund (1993)
The United Nations
Bulletin of The American Society for Information Science and Technology, 20
(2014)
Data for African Development Working Group
(Miller, S. R., Eden, L., & Li, D. 2020. CSR reputation and firm performance: A dynamic approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(3): 619–636. 10.1007/s10551-018-4057-1. Accessed 2 July 2020.)
Miller, S. R., Eden, L., & Li, D. 2020. CSR reputation and firm performance: A dynamic approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(3): 619–636. 10.1007/s10551-018-4057-1. Accessed 2 July 2020.
Miller, S. R., Eden, L., & Li, D. 2020. CSR reputation and firm performance: A dynamic approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(3): 619–636. 10.1007/s10551-018-4057-1. Accessed 2 July 2020., Miller, S. R., Eden, L., & Li, D. 2020. CSR reputation and firm performance: A dynamic approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(3): 619–636. 10.1007/s10551-018-4057-1. Accessed 2 July 2020.

Publisher: Pubmed Central
Copyright: © Academy of International Business 2020
ISSN: 2522-0691
eISSN: 2522-0705
DOI: 10.1057/s42214-020-00054-w
Publisher site: See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Lorraine Eden and Evidence-based policymaking (EBP) contends that policy decisions are M. Fernanda Wagstaff successful when informed by evidence. However, where policy problems are ‘‘wicked’’ (systemic, ambiguous, complex, and conﬂictual), politics trumps Department of Management, TAMU 4221, Mays evidence and solutions are never ﬁrst best or permanent. Applying an EBP Business School, Texas A&M University, approach to solving wicked problems (WPs) therefore appears to be a College Station, TX 77843-4221, USA; daunting, impossible task. Despite the difﬁculties, we contend that blending Department of Marketing and Management, The insights from the EBP and WP literatures can provide actionable and practical University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX 79968, USA policy advice to governments and MNEs for dealing with the WPs of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We support our thesis with a case Correspondence: study applying EBP to the WP of SDG 5 Gender Equality. We compare the L Eden, Department of Management, TAMU statistical evidence from gender inequality indexes to SDG 5’s targets and 4221, Mays Business School, Texas A&M indicators. We provide ﬁve insights from the EBP and WP literatures into why University, College Station, TX 77843-4221, and how good evidence is necessary but not sufﬁcient for progress on SDG 5. USA Building on these insights, we recommend that governments adopt an EBP e-mail: [email protected] approach employing public–private partnerships to address SDG 5. We also recommend that MNE executives use our new SDG Materiality Matrix, designed on EBP principles, to build SDG 5 into their global corporate social responsibility strategies. Journal of International Business Policy (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s42214-020-00054-w Keywords: sustainable development; gender equality; corporate social responsibility; evidence-based policymaking; wicked problems; gender inequality indexes; materiality; nonmarket strategy; policy-oriented studies INTRODUCTION On 25 September 2015, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, a general pledge to ‘‘transform our world’’ and ‘‘leave no one behind’’ in terms of the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of sustainable development (UN, 2015b). The 2030 Agenda estab- lished 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with a long list of targets and indicators that were to be collected, shared, and monitored by the UN Member States. Received: 27 May 2019 The 2030 Agenda is a form of goal-based global governance, Revised: 19 May 2020 where the 17 global goals deﬁne the sustainable development Accepted: 21 May 2020 Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff aspirations of UN Member Countries and their management or leadership mindsets, or with old major stakeholders (Fukuda-Parr, 2014). Global organizational structures’’ (van Tulder, 2018: 34). If goals are instruments that ‘‘translate norms from WPs cannot be solved, policymakers may instead the language of words to that of numbers, coupled need to focus on managing or coping (Daviter, with setting time bound targets’’ (Fukuda-Parr & 2017; Head, 2019: 183). Assuming WPs scholars are McNeill, 2018: 6). Since the SDGs are voluntary, correct, and slow progress on the SDGs was lack sanctions, and have few mechanisms to ensure inevitable, what can policymakers do to ensure their achievement, the 2030 Agenda is a form of that the SDGs get back on track, or – given the ‘‘soft’’ international law (van Zanten & van Tulder, global crisis now unfolding – that the SDGs are not 2018: 212). derailed permanently? Progress on the 2030 Agenda has been slow, and We contend that insights from the evidence- criticisms have begun to appear. A January 2020 based policymaking (EBP) literature can be helpful editorial in Nature (2020) argued that the SDGs in spotlighting difﬁculties and suggesting policy were ‘‘not on track’’ and had a ‘‘bleak trend.’’ Nature directions for managing the WPs of the 2030 noted that only two targets were close to being Agenda. EBP puts ‘‘the best available evidence from achieved, and predicted that most SDGs would miss research at the heart of policy development and their 2030 target date. Lack of funding (an esti- implementation’’ (Davies, 2004: 3). EBP scholars mated shortfall of 2.5 trillion USD) and lack of recognize that good evidence is necessary but not government commitment were suggested as possi- sufﬁcient for good policymaking. Recognition that ble causes. There are also other reasons why the EBP is being applied to WPs can help dampen SDGs may be off track. For example, scholars have policymaker expectations, point out where difﬁcul- argued that many SDG targets are so conceptually ties and disputes are likely, and clarify achievable complex that they cannot be translated into mea- metrics for success. surable indicators (Breuer, Janetschek, & Malerba, We illustrate how insights from both the WP and 2019). The SDGs themselves may be a problem, EBP literatures can be useful for addressing the 2030 both their lack of prioritization (Breuer et al., 2019) Agenda through a case study of SDG 5 Gender and their number; there may be ‘‘too many goals, Equality, ‘‘achieve gender equality and empower all too little focus’’ for meaningful policymaking women and girls’’ (UN, 2015b: 14). Gender equality (Selin, 2015:1). was originally a UN 2000–2015 Millennium Devel- The prospects for achieving the SDGs by 2030 opment Goal, which was carried over as SDG 5 in have now become signiﬁcantly worse since the the 2030 Agenda (UN, 2015a, b). The global goal for COVID-19 pandemic spread across the globe in SDG 5 is to achieve gender equality, and to early 2020. In March, the estimated global cost of empower women and girls by eliminating gender the pandemic for 2020 in terms of forgone world disparities, discrimination, and violence against GDP was $1 trillion USD (Garten, 2020); by May, women (UN, 2015b). A case study of SDG 5 is the estimate for 2020–2021 had risen to a 2-year particularly appropriate because this year marks the loss of $8 trillion USD (UN, 2020: 1). The UN 25th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Secretary-General has called the coronavirus the Platform for Action that asserted that women’s ‘‘most challenging crisis since World War II’’, one rights were human rights (UN Women, 1995). This that could cause a recession with ‘‘no parallel in the year is also the 20th anniversary of the UN Security recent past’’ (Lederer, 2020). The effects are Council’s Resolution 1325 on women, peace, and expected to be catastrophic for developing coun- security, and the 10th anniversary of the establish- tries, and halt progress towards the SDGs ment of UN Women (UN Women, 2020). Our study (UNCTAD, 2020b). of SDG 5 is also especially salient, given that the We believe that slow progress on the 2030 harmful impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic are Agenda was inevitable, even before the coronavirus expected to fall disproportionately on women pandemic, because the issues the UN are addressing (Alon, Doepke, Olmstead-Rumsey, & Tertilt, 2020; are wicked problems (WPs; Rittel, 1972; Rittel & UNCTAD, 2020a). Webber, 1973; Alford & Head, 2017; Head, 2019). We begin by reviewing the WP literature and its WPs are ‘‘systemic in nature, complexly interre- applicability to the 2020 Agenda, focusing on SDG lated, and materialize at the interface between 5. We next analyze the existing evidence on gender public–private and proﬁt–nonproﬁt interests’’; as a equality. We employ country-based comparisons of result, they cannot be handled with ‘‘old the best-available gender inequality indexes, and Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff assess their ability to appropriately measure SDG 5’s or wrong; thus, a systems approach was unlikely to targets and indicators. We then turn to the EBP be successful. literature and show how EBP can provide useful Since the late 1970s, the WP literature has grown insights for policymaking when faced with WPs. dramatically, in terms of both the number of We argue that the generation and dissemination of scholarly disciplines and policy areas. Ten key high-quality, reliable evidence is necessary but not propositions underlie WP theory (see, e.g., McCall sufﬁcient for making progress on the 2030 Agenda. & Burge, 2016; Crowley & Head, 2017; Peters & Policymakers must also prepare for the many ‘‘slips Tarpey, 2019: 236), which are summarized below: between the cup and the lip’’ that bedevil EBP in • Problem: (1) hard to deﬁne and no deﬁnite addressing WPs. Lastly, we build on these insights formulation; (2) no stopping rule; (3) unique; to develop policy recommendations for govern- (4) multiple explanations; and (5) may be symp- ments and multinational enterprises (MNEs) for tomatic of another problem. dealing with the WP of SDG 5. Figure 1 provides an • Solution: (1) not true or false but only good or bad; outline of our paper. (2) no immediate or ultimate test; (3) no clear solution or even set of possible solutions; (4) attempts at solutions have effects that may not be THE WICKED PROBLEM OF SDG 5 GENDER reversible or forgettable; and (5) policymakers EQUALITY bear the responsibility for wrong solutions. What are Wicked Problems? The WP literature began as a critique of the systems WP scholars believe that most policy problems approach to policymaking (Rittel, 1972; Rittel & have some degree of wickedness, so they cannot be Webber, 1973). In the systems approach, the plan- solved using rational-scientiﬁc methods (Newman ner implements a policy cycle with several steps: & Head, 2017). Complexity is viewed as a key understand the problem; gather and analyze evi- driver of wickedness, both the complexity of the dence; generate and assess solutions; and imple- problem (factual uncertainty) and of the actors/ ment, test, and modify the solution. Rittel (1972) institutions involved (Alford & Head, 2017; Davi- and Rittel and Webber (1973) criticized the systems ter, 2019). As the number and diversity of stake- approach, arguing that it could only handle ‘‘tame’’ holders and institutional contexts rise, so does the problems. Since WPs were inherently unsolvable, heterogeneity of preferences and interests, increas- their solutions could only be good or bad, not right ing the likelihood of conﬂict (Bannink & Trommel, Figure 1 Applying evidence- The Wicked The Role of Evidence in Creating Good SDG 5 Policy Problem of SDG 5 Implications Evidence-Based Policymaking Evidence for SDG 5 based policymaking to the wicked problem of SDG 5 2030 Agenda Steps in Steps in Evidence-Based Gender Equality. Policymaker Policymaking Evidence Collection � Governments � Selection of Targets • Agenda Setting �SDG 1 and Indicators � Multinational � Policy Formulation �SDG 2 Enterprises � Selection of Data �SDG 3 Sources � Collect best available �SDG 4 � Assignment of Data evidence Evidence-Based Collection Roles and Actions � Interpret evidence for the Responsibility policy context � SDG 5: � Creation of Data � Evidence Collection Gender Protocols, Manuals, Equality and Training Materials � Policy Selection � Evidence used in Policy � Data Collection and � Policy Implementation � Selection Reporting �SDG 6 � Implementation � Policy Monitoring, Evaluation & � Data Cleaning and � Monitoring Revision �SDG 7 Quality Analysis � Evaluation �SDG 8 � Revision � Preparation of � Set up monitoring Statistics and Indexes �... procedures, measures � Dissemination of and instruments �… Results � Evaluate policy using �SDG 17 monitoring evidence Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff 2019). Uncertainty and ambiguity exacerbate both 2030 Agenda is that no one must be left behind – a complexity and conﬂict, increasing the degree of huge societal challenge. Speciﬁc vulnerable groups wickedness (van Tulder, 2018). are also regularly mentioned (e.g., women, chil- Key issues in the WP literature are how to address dren, minorities, migrants, refugees) and no vul- a WP and how to deﬁne success. Since WPs ‘‘are nerable groups can be left behind. never solved. At best they are only resolved – over To explore the WP of the 2030 Agenda in more and over again’’ (Rittel & Webber, 1973: 160), depth, we provide a case study of SDG 5 Gender policymakers cannot achieve ﬁrst-best solutions. A Equality ‘‘achieve gender equality and empower all frequent recommendation for addressing WPs, women and girls’’ (UN, 2015b: 14). SDG 5 is building on Rittel and Webber (1973), is that new decomposed into 9 targets and 14 indicators (UN, and different ways of thinking are needed, and so 2019); see Table 1. Ten of the other SDGs also also is collaboration or partnering among societal include gender-speciﬁc indicators; as a result, 22% actors where they share joint responsibility for the of the indicators for the 17 SDGs are gender speciﬁc solutions (Ney & Verweij, 2015; Crowley & Head, (UN, 2019: 21–23), implying that gender equality is 2017; Daviter, 2017; Termeer & Dewulf, 2019). an important, cross-cutting goal in the 2030 An unexpected and paradoxical consequence of Agenda. framing policy problems as wicked is that policy- The word ‘‘gender’’ refers to ‘‘the socially-con- makers may choose to do nothing and just live with structed roles and responsibilities that societies the problem (Bannink & Trommel, 2019). ‘‘Paraly- consider appropriate for men and women’’ (Peace sis occurs when people experience or deﬁne the Corps, 2020). Gender equality means that ‘‘women wickedness as so overwhelming that it discourages and men enjoy the same rights and opportunities them and prevents them from doing anything across all sectors of society, including economic about it’’ (Termeer, Dewulf, & Biesbroek, 2019: participation and decision-making, [and that]…. 176). Paralysis can be particularly wicked when the different behaviours, aspirations and needs of grand societal challenges are framed negatively women and men are equally valued and favoured’’ (van Tulder, 2018: 19). To avoid choice paralysis, (UNCTAD, 2016: 31). Gender equality is a ‘‘funda- policymakers are encouraged to explore ‘‘intelligent mental human right’’ and ‘‘keystone of a prosper- modes of imperfect governance’’ (Bannink & Trom- ous, modern economy that provides sustainable mel, 2019: 198), and to look for solutions that are inclusive growth’’ (OECD, 2017:3). ‘‘clumsy’’ or ‘‘just viable’’, which ‘‘everyone can In the international business (IB) literature, gen- more or less agree to live with’’ and are ‘‘responsive der equality has typically been deﬁned as equal to different rationalities’’ (van Tulder, 2018: 39). treatment of women and men in the workplace Policymakers are also encouraged to focus on (Eden & Gupta, 2017; O’Brien, Fitzsimmons, Crane, identifying, valuing, and learning from ‘‘small & Head, 2017; UNCTAD, 2014, 2018; UN Economic wins’’ (Termeer & Dewulf, 2019). Small wins are Commission for Europe, 2019b). Workplace gender preferable to either doing too little (i.e., settling for inequality is viewed as having many causes, includ- paralysis or ‘‘cherry-picking’’ the least wicked parts ing gender discrimination and stereotyping, under- of a problem) or expecting too much (i.e., the valuation of women’s work, gender-based labor solving of an inherently unsolvable problem). market segmentation, traditions and culture that treat men and women unequally, and work–life SDG 5 Gender Equality as a Wicked Problem balance issues (UNCTAD, 2014: 4). O’Brien et al. Scholars clearly view the 2030 Agenda as an (2017) hypothesize that workplace gender inequal- example of a WP (Head, 2019; van Tulder, 2018). ity has three WP characteristics: divergence, com- A core thesis of van Tulder (2018: 37) is that all 17 plexity, and uncertainty. There are divergent views SDGs are WPs. The SDGs are ‘‘systemic in nature, about the problem, no agreed deﬁnitions, and large complexly interrelated and materialize at the inter- differences in values, underlying beliefs and inter- face between public–private and proﬁt–nonproﬁt pretations of ﬁndings. Workplace gender inequality interests. They are wicked both by nature and also suffers from complexity due its multiple design’’ (van Tulder, 2018: 36) because they suffer causes, lack of a dominant solution, and complex from uncertainty, complexity, erratic dynamics, linkages with other societal issues. Lastly, uncer- and ambiguity – all symptoms of WPs. The SDGs tainty affects problem deﬁnition, prevents optimal are societal problems, not tame or technical prob- solutions, and causes unintended consequences. lems; for example, the guiding principle of the The authors argue that policymaking requires Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Table 1 SDG 5 targets, indicators, and gender equality metrics SDG 5 Target SDG 5 Target Indicators GII GGGI SIGI EM 2030 SDG Index 5.1 End all forms of discrimination against 5.1.1 Whether or not legal frameworks are in all women and girls everywhere place to promote, enforce and monitor equality and non-discrimination on the basis of sex 5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against 5.2.1 Proportion of ever-partnered women all women and girls in the public and and girls aged 15 years and older subjected private spheres, including trafficking and to physical, sexual or psychological violence sexual and other types of exploitation by a current or former intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by form of violence and age 5.2.2 Proportion of women and girls aged 15 years and older subjected to sexual violence by persons other than an intimate partner in the previous 12 months, by age and place of occurrence 5.3 Eliminate all harmful practices, such 5.3.1 Proportion of women aged 20– as child, early and forced marriage and 24 years who were married or in a union female genital mutilation before age 15 and before age 18 5.3.2 Proportion of girls and women aged 15–49 years who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting, by age 5.4 Recognize and value unpaid care and 5.4.1 Proportion of time spent on unpaid domestic work through the provision of domestic and care work, by sex, age and public services, infrastructure and social location protection policies and the promotion of shared responsibility within the household and the family as nationally appropriate 5.5 Ensure women’s full and effective 5.5.1 Proportion of seats held by women in participation and equal opportunities for (a) national parliaments and (b) local leadership at all levels of decision-making governments in political, economic and public life 5.5.2 Proportion of women in managerial positions 5.6 Ensure universal access to sexual and 5.6.1 Proportion of women aged 15– reproductive health and reproductive 49 years who make their own informed rights as agreed in accordance with the decisions regarding sexual relations, Programme of Action of the International contraceptive use and reproductive health Conference on Population and care Development and the Beijing Platform for 5.6.2 Number of countries with laws and Action and the outcome documents of regulations that guarantee full and equal their review conferences access to women and men aged 15 years and older to sexual and reproductive health care, information and education 5.a Undertake reforms to give women 5.a.1 (a) Proportion of total agricultural equal rights to economic resources, as population with ownership or secure rights well as access to ownership and control over agricultural land, by sex; and (b) share over land and other forms of property, of women among owners or rights-bearers of financial services, inheritance and natural agricultural land, by type of tenure resources, in accordance with national 5.a.2 Proportion of countries where the legal laws. framework (including customary law) guarantees women’s equal rights to land ownership and/or control 5.b Enhance the use of enabling 5.b.1 Proportion of individuals who own a technology, in particular information and mobile telephone, by sex communications technology, to promote the empowerment of women 5.c Adopt and strengthen sound policies 5.c.1 Proportion of countries with systems to and enforceable legislation for the track and make public allocations for gender promotion of gender equality and the equality and women’s empowerment empowerment of all women and girls at all levels Sources: for SDG 5 targets and indicators: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/indicators-list/; for GII metrics see http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/ gender-inequality-index-gii; for GGGI metrics see WEF (158, Table 1); for SIGI see Branisa et al. (2014 and Supplemental Material); for EM2030 see EM2030 and Supplemental Material at https://data.em2030.org/2019-sdg-gender-index/methodology/, for SDG Index see SDSN (2019, Tables 5 and 7). These metrics may cover partially or totally the target indicators. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff methodological reﬂexivity, the ability to see mul- women lead the authors to conclude that ‘‘the true tiple world views, and the need to pay attention to clash of civilizations is not about religion or context. Rational approaches based on a single ethnicity but about the subordination of women’’ discipline cannot handle the WP of achieving (Hudson et al., 2020: 377). Thus, whether measured workplace gender equality. as workplace gender equality or as women’s It is important to recognize, however, that SDG 5 empowerment, SDG 5 is a wicked problem. is about more than workplace gender equality; it is also about the empowerment of women and girls. The MEASURING GENDER (IN)EQUALITY goal of SDG 5 is equality between men and women in their rights and opportunities, their valuation The Gender Inequality Indexes and treatment, and their empowerment (i.e., the One way to assess gender inequality is to examine fostering of women’s voice and agency). Women’s government policies and laws promoting gender empowerment can be deﬁned as ‘‘a woman’s sense equality; however, policies on the books are not the of self-worth, her decision-making power, her same as policies in practice. A second way is to access to opportunities and resources, her power examine gender-based statistics, and, in fact, statis- and control over her own life inside and outside the tical indexes are the most common empirical home, and her ability to effect change’’ (Peace method for assessing differences between men Corps, 2020). and women. The two best-known indexes are the Women’s empowerment has been shown to be a UN Development Programme’s (UNDP’s) Global fundamental and necessary input for economic and Inequality Index (GII), available since 2010, and social development. The most recent empirical the World Economic Forum’s (WEF’s) Global Gen- evidence on the negative economic and social der Gap Index (GGGI), available since 2006. Given consequences of disempowering women (such as that the GII and GGGI were not developed for SDG worse governance, more conﬂict, less stability, 5, a few international and non-governmental orga- worse economic performance, and slower social nizations (NGOs) have started to build new indexes progress) can be found in Hudson, Bowen and for SDG 5, responding to the UN (2015a, b). These Nielsen (2020). The authors assert that women’s indexes (the OECD’s SIGI, the SDSN SDG Index, disempowerment is pervasive and embedded in and the Equal Measures 2030 2019 SDG Gender societies around the world. Disempowerment has Index) attempt to measure gender equality across four dimensions: status (whether male and female countries and across time by collecting a broad set groups engage as equals or as subordinate and of socio-economic indicators on workplace gender superordinate), decision-making (whether deci- inequality and women’s empowerment. Below, we sions are made by one or both groups), conﬂict brieﬂy review the ﬁve indexes and compare them in resolution (how disagreements are resolved, terms of SDG 5’s targets and indicators. whether one group can be coerced against its will), and resource distribution (whether control over The UNDP global inequality index (GII) resources is by one or both groups). Hudson et al. The GII is designed to measure the human devel- (2020) argue that patrilineal/fraternal networks opment costs of gender inequality; i.e., the higher (e.g., tribes and clans) support and encourage the GII value, the greater the gender gap and the practices that disempower women, such as violence larger the loss in human development (UNDP, towards women, personal status laws beneﬁtting 2018, 2019). The GII measures inequality between men, laws that prevent women from owning men and women in terms of economic opportu- property, preferences for sons over daughters, and nity, reproductive health, and empowerment. The polygyny. The authors create a women’s disem- GII combines women-speciﬁc indicators with indi- powerment index to assess the presence or absence cators for both men and women; some scholars of these harmful practices in 176 countries over view this as an ‘‘odd mixture’’ of ‘‘women status’’ 2010–2015, ﬁnding that 56 countries score low on (level) and ‘‘gender inequality’’ (gap) (Permanyer the index (mostly OECD countries), 40 countries 2013a, b: 940). Table 1 compares the components score high (primarily in Sub-Saharan Africa, the of GII to the SDG 5 targets and indicators; Table 2 Middle East, and West and South Asia), and the rest summarizes the GII targets, indicators and data are in between (Hudson et al., 2020: 54). The sources. pervasiveness of these harmful practices against Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff The WEF global gender gap index (GGGI) Equal Measures 2030 SDG gender index (EM 2030 The GGGI measures the gap between men and gender index) women in four target areas: economic participation The EM 2030 index uses indicators developed by the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indi- and opportunity, health and survival, political empowerment, and educational attainment. The cators. The index was developed from several GGGI is reverse-coded from the GII so a higher frameworks: the UN Women SDG Indicator Frame- GGGI score implies a country is closer to equality work and Women Turning Promises into Action (GGGI = 1; GII = 0). Table 1 compares the compo- report, the UN Minimum Set of Gender Indicators agreed by the UN Statistical Commission in 2013, nents of GGGI to the SDG 5 targets and indicators, and Table 2 summarizes the GGGI targets, indica- and the Ready to Measure study produced by tors and data sources. Table 2 also compares the GII DATA2x (EM 2030, 2019; Buvinic, Furst-Nichols, and GGGI in terms of their targets and indicators; & Koolwal, 2014; Buvinic & Levine, 2015). There differences between the two indexes are shown in are two EM 2030 indexes; a broad index including 51 gender-related indicators from 14 SDGs and a bold text. The index is designed to disassociate the gender narrower index for only SDG 5 indicators. Table 1 gap from a country’s level of economic develop- compares the components of the narrower index to ment, i.e., the index uses the male–female gap, not the SDG 5 targets and indicators. Higher scores the actual level, for each indicator. The GGGI also represent greater gender equality. uses ratios, and caps each ratio at 1 (gender The SDSN SDG gender index (SDSN gender index) equality) for countries where women outperform The Sustainable Development Solutions Network or have reached parity with men on the indicator. (SDSN) and Bertelsmann Stiftung developed the The index is also designed to capture outcomes SDG Index and Dashboards to cover all 17 SDGs rather than causal factors of gender inequality, such (Schmidt-Traub, Kroll, Teksoz, Durand-Delacre, & as culture or government policies. In sum, the Sachs, 2017; Sachs, Schmidt-Traub, Kroll, LaFor- GGGI measures gaps not levels, outcomes not tune, & Fuller, 2019). The SDG targets are grouped inputs, and equality not empowerment (WEF, into ‘‘ﬁve P’s: Prosperity, People, Planet, Peace, and 2020: 45). Partnership.’’ Country scores range from 0 to 100, The OECD social institutions and gender index (SIGI) with higher scores representing greater gender equality (Sachs et al., 2019: 1). The components The SIGI was created to track progress on gender of the SDSN gender index relative to the SDG 5 equality for the 2015 Millennium Development Goals (Branisa, Klasen, Ziegler, Drechsler, & Jutting, targets and indicators are reported in Table 1. 2014: 31–32). Its ﬁve targets (discrimination in the Statistical Comparison of the Indexes family, restricted physical integrity, restricted To date, only the GII and GGGI have sufﬁcient access to productive and ﬁnancial resources, and years of data to compare them over time; it will be restricted civil liberties) are meant to capture the some years before the other indexes are sufﬁciently deprivation of women caused by gender gaps in developed to make robust historical comparisons. social institutions (OECD, 2018a, b, 2019). Data We focus below on the GII and GGGI, building on from the OECD’s Gender, Institutions and Devel- Eden and Gupta (2017). opment Database are used to create the SIGI, which is currently available for 4 years (2009, 2012, 2014, The UNDP gender inequality index (GII) 2018). The SIGI scores 120 countries and organizes Table 3 shows the GII scores for several years them into quintiles; thus, the SIGI not only has a between 2000 and 2017. Note that lower GII values shorter time series but also includes fewer countries represent greater movement toward SDG 5. The than either the GII or the GGGI (OECD, 2019). world average GII score fell from 0.432 in 2000 to Table 1 compares the components of the SIGI to 0.350 in 2017; thus, the gender gap shrank by the SDG 5 targets and indicators. The index is 18.9% between 2000 and 2017. Given that gender reverse-coded like the GII where 0 represents per- equality is deﬁned as GII = 0, a 35% gap still exists fect equality and 1 perfect inequality. between men and women as of 2017. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Table 2 GII and GGGI targets and indicators GII targets and indicators GGGI targets and indicators Economic opportunity Economic participation and opportunity • Labor force participation for women age 15 and older (ILO) • Labor force participation: female/male (ILO, ILOSTATAT) • Labor force participation for men age 15 and older (ILO) • Wage equality between women and men for similar work (WEF-Executive Opinion Survey) • Estimated earned income: female/male (WEF- UNDP methodology) • Legislators, senior ofﬁcial and managers: female/male (ILOSTAT) • Professional and technical workers: female/male (ILOSTAT) Reproductive health Health and survival • Number of women who died from pregnancy-related causes • Sex ratio at birth: female/male (UN Population for every 100,000 live births (UN Maternal Mortality Division, World Population Prospects) Estimation Group) • Healthy life expectancy: female/male (WHO, • Birth per 1000 women ages 15–19 (UNDESA) Global Health Observatory) Empowerment Political empowerment • Percentage of parliamentary seats held by women (IPU) • Seats in parliament: female/male (Inter-Parliamentary • Percentage of women age 25 and older with at least some secondary Union, Women in Politics) education (UNESCO Institute for Statistics; Barro & Lee, 2016) • Positions at ministerial level: female/male (IPU, • Percentage of men age 25 and older with at least some secondary Women in Politics) education • Number of years with a female head of state (last 50 years): female/male (WEF calculations) Educational Attainment (UNESCO Institute for Statistics Education Indicators) • Literary rate: female/male • Net primary enrolment: female/male • Net secondary enrolment: female/male • Gross tertiary enrolment: female/male Data sources in parentheses. Bold text shows that indicators are included in that index but missing from the other index. ILO International Labor Organization; WEF World Economic Forum; UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientiﬁc and Cultural Organization; UN United Nations; WHO World Health Organization; UNDESA United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs; IPU Inter-Parliamentary Union. The UNDP also calculates and publishes the looking vertically (by year), we calculate the gap in Human Development Index (HDI) in which coun- GII scores between the bottom (Low HDI) and top tries are grouped into clusters based on their (Very High HDI) groups, as a raw score and ratio. economic and social development levels. The HDI The gap between the raw scores falls slightly groupings can help us see how different country between 2000 and 2017, implying a small narrow- groups are progressing towards gender equality ing of the gender gap. The ratio of the raw scores relative to one another and over time. We calculate (Low HDI/Very High HDI) rises from 2000 to 2017, and report the GII score in Table 3 for the four HDI suggesting that Low HDI group lagged behind the groups in two different ways. First, for each row other HDI groups in improvements in gender (HDI group), we calculate the difference in GII equality. scores between the base year (2000) and the most The WEF global gender gap index (GGGI) recent year (2017), as a raw score and as a percent of We also collected GGGI data for 2006–2017 and the base year. Since lower GII scores reﬂect greater linked the GGGI data with the UNDP’s HDI coun- gender equality, negative numbers represent try groups; our statistical results are reported in improved performance and closer movement Table 4. The world average GGGI rose between toward SDG 5. Looking from left to right across 2006 and 2017 from 0.663 to 0.698, implying a each row (each HDI group), we ﬁnd that gender modest 3.5% improvement in gender equality. As equality improved (i.e., the GII score fell) for all of 2017, the gender gap recorded by the GGGI is four HDI groups. The improvement was largest in 30.2%, a bit smaller than the 35% gap recorded by the High and Very High HDI countries. Second, Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Table 3 The UNDP gender inequality index, 2000–2017 Country average by Human 2000 2005 2010 2013 2014 2017 Point gap Percent change Development Index (HDI) Group 2000–2017 2000–2017 World average 0.4315 0.4199 0.3886 0.3754 0.3659 0.3500 -0.0815 -18.89 Very High HDI countries 0.2112 0.1991 0.1825 0.1532 0.1500 0.1520 -0.0592 -28.04 High HDI countries 0.4927 0.4119 0.3887 0.3560 0.3458 0.3457 -0.1470 -29.83 Medium HDI countries 0.5419 0.5419 0.4939 0.4852 0.4716 0.4761 -0.0658 -12.14 Low HDI countries 0.6746 0.6396 0.6035 0.5953 0.5929 0.6024 -0.0722 -10.70 Point gap between Low and Very High 0.4633 0.4404 0.4210 0.4421 0.4429 0.4504 HDI countries Ratio of Low HDI to Very High HDI 3.1936 3.2116 3.3064 3.8866 3.9520 3.9632 countries No. of countries with data points 83 137 133 152 155 160 Source: Authors’ calculations based on GII data from the UNDP website: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/gender-inequality-index-gii. the GII. Looking across the rows in Table 4, gender included in GGGI that are missing from GII (e.g., inequality fell in all four HDI groups, with the wage equality, female/male ratio of earned largest improvement in the Low HDI group. Look- income). ing down the columns, the gap between the raw A second reason is that the goals and how they scores of the low and very high HDI countries fell are implemented differ between the two indexes. over the period, while the ratio of the raw scores The GGGI is designed to remove country levels of (Low HDI/Very High HDI) rose slightly, indicating economic development; i.e., the index reﬂects gaps that the GGGI gap narrowed across the HDI groups in gender equality ignoring the development in over time. Thus, measured across HDI groups, the each country. The GII, on the other hand, is gender gap between Low and Very High HDI designed to incorporate the loss in human devel- countries narrowed, suggesting that improvements opment as a function of gender inequality (Per- in gender equality were larger in Low HDI manyer, 2013a, b; Piper, 2019; WEF, 2018, 2020). countries. The differential treatment of economic develop- ment is clear when we compare the GGGI and GII Assessing the Evidence on Gender Equality scores across the four HDI country groupings. Table 3 shows that the GII score for Low HDI Comparing the GII and GGGI: Why are their country countries is nearly four times the score for Very rankings so different? High HDI countries. Table 4, on the other hand, A comparison between the results for the GII in shows very small differences in GGGI scores across Table 3 and the GGGI in Table 4 reveals a perplex- the four HDI groups. Even when one inverts the ing picture. Table 3 shows a large gap in GII scores ratio because GGGI is reverse-coded from GII, there between Low and Very High HDI country groups is little variance by HDI level in the GGGI com- that widens over time. Table 4, on the other hand, pared with the GII. This result is deliberate: the shows that the gap in GGGI scores between Low GGGI is designed to disassociate the gender gap and Very High HDI countries is much smaller and from country levels of development, while GII is narrows over time. Both indexes are on a scale of 1 designed to include the impact of gender inequality although they reverse code equality [gender equal- on potential human development. As a result, some ity = 0 (GII), 1 (GGGI)]. What explains the differ- scholars worry that the GII may be proxying not ences between the two indexes, when considered only for differences in gender equality but also for by HDI group? differences in living standards across countries; this We hypothesize that the puzzling ﬁndings noted concern does not apply to the GGGI (Sotsky, above are due, ﬁrst, to differences in the targets and Shibuya, Kolovich, & Kebhai, 2016). indicators for the GII and GGGI. Table 2 puts in bold text the indicators that are included in one Two-country case study: Mozambique and Nicaragua index but not the other. There are several differ- As a second exploration of the underlying differ- ences; e.g., there are four economic indicators ences between the GII and the GGGI, we provide a brief two-country case study. We selected two Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff developing countries: Mozambique and Nicaragua. Both countries are ranked, when compared with the world average, relatively low on the GII but relatively high on the GGGI. Table 5 provides data for the two countries in terms of all ﬁve gender indexes (where available). We highlight in bold text the score of the country (Mozambique or Nicar- agua) that performs better on each indicator. We also provide average world scores for comparison. As Table 5 shows, Nicaragua outperforms Mozambique on all ﬁve gender indexes and on most indicators. Both countries rank poorly on the GII (Mozambique = 138; Nicaragua = 106) but do well on the GGGI (Mozambique = 29; Nicaragua = 6). The ﬁrst reason for why both countries do poorly on the GII but well on the GGGI is because their indicators also do so; i.e., selection of the indicators is a key reason for the anomaly. The second reason is also visible; i.e., the way the indicators are measured. By focusing on gaps not levels and outcomes not inputs, the GGGI takes economic development out of the equation, whereas the GII deliberately includes human devel- opment. Thus, with GGGI – but not GII – women may be worse off (in absolute terms) even though the gender gap is small. Workplace gender equality versus women’s empowerment Our analysis of the GII and GGGI shows clearly that the two indexes are more narrowly focused than SDG 5. The targets and indicators for SDG 5 are designed to capture both gender inequality and empowerment, particularly for marginalized groups and others ‘‘left behind.’’ The SDG 5 targets also consider not only gender inequality outcomes but also their antecedents, such as government poli- cies, laws, and customs. As Table 1 shows, with the exception of target 5.5 (women’s leadership) and target 5.c (policies and laws), neither GII nor GGGI cover the other targets and indicators in SDG 5. We conjecture that the narrow foci of the GII and GGGI reﬂects an implicit focus on gender equality in the workplace rather than empowerment of women and girls. For example, neither the GII nor GGGI incorporate measures that Hudson et al. (2020) see as critical components of women’s disempow- erment. As a result, neither the GII nor the GGGI is as comprehensive as UN SDG 5, which treats gender equality from a holistic perspective, consid- ering voice, agency, and the empowerment of women and girls. Journal of International Business Policy Table 4 The WEF global gender gap index, 2006–2017 Country average by Human 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2016 2017 Point gap Percent Development Index (HDI) 2006– change Group 2017 2006–2017 World average 0.6626 0.6677 0.6751 0.6784 0.6786 0.6799 0.6844 0.6864 0.6947 0.6978 0.0352 5.3110 Very High HDI countries 0.6903 0.6972 0.7016 0.7050 0.7121 0.7136 0.7154 0.7179 0.7223 0.7256 0.0353 5.1084 High HDI countries 0.6637 0.6670 0.6763 0.6774 0.6734 0.6728 0.6756 0.6790 0.6856 0.6944 0.0307 4.6226 Medium HDI countries 0.6543 0.6571 0.6621 0.6725 0.6709 0.6713 0.6758 0.6782 0.6936 0.6947 0.0404 6.1774 Low HDI countries 0.6005 0.6102 0.6228 0.6246 0.6226 0.6314 0.6458 0.6463 0.6645 0.6643 0.0638 10.6215 Point gap between Low and -0.0898 -0.0871 -0.0789 -0.0804 -0.0895 -0.0822 -0.0696 -0.0716 -0.0578 -0.0613 Very High HDI countries Ratio of Low HDI to Very High 0.8699 0.8751 0.8876 0.8860 0.8743 0.8848 0.9027 0.9003 0.9200 0.9155 HDI countries No. of countries with data 110 122 124 128 130 131 133 136 144 144 points In calculating the overall GGGI average we used all 144 countries in the GGGI dataset. However, because North Korea is missing an HDI score and group, we used 143 countries in calculating the HDI country groupings. Source: Authors’ calculations based on WEF data for the Global Gender Gap. Data for 2016 and 2017 are from WEF (2017). Data for 2006–2013 are from the Humanitarian Data Exchange at https:// data.humdata.org/dataset/global-gender-gap-index-world-economic-forum. Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Table 5 Comparison of Nicaragua and Mozambique gender equality scores, 2017–2018 Mozambique Nicaragua World Overall SDG and SDG 5 scores and ranks UNDP GII Score (higher ? less gender equality) 0.552 0.456 0.441 UNDP GII Country Rank (out of 160 countries) 138 106 WEF GGGI Score (higher ? more gender equality) 0.741 0.814 0.680 WEF GGGI Country Rank (out of 144 countries) 29 6 OECD SIGI Score (higher ? less gender equality) .24 .19 .29 OECD SIGI Country Rank (out of 120 countries) 55 30 SDSN SDG 5 Score (higher ? more gender equality) 60.0 82.1 60.17 SDSN SDG 5 Country Rank (out of 162 countries) 81 14 EM 2030 SDG 5 Score (higher ? more gender equality) 61.1 73.4 62.0 EM 2030 SDG 5 Country Rank (out of 129 countries) 114 84 UNDP GII Indicators Female labor force participation rate (%, age 15+) 82.5 50.3 48.7 Male labor force participation rate (%, age 15+) 74.6 84.0 75.3 Maternal mortality ratio (deaths per 100,000 live births) 489 150 216 Adolescent birth rate (births per 1000 women aged 15–19) 135.2 85.4 44.0 Share of seats in parliament (% held by women) 39.6 45.7 23.5 Female population, some secondary education (%, age 25+) 16.1 48.3 62.5 Male population, some secondary education (%, age 25+) 27.3 46.6 70.9 WEF GGGI targets/indicators Economic participation and opportunity 0.789 0.702 0.65 Educational attainment 0.857 1.00 0.96 Health and survival 0.977 0.98 0.97 Political empowerment 0.34 0.576 0.20 SDSN SDG 5 Indicators Unmet demand for contraception 56.8 7.2 NA Female/male mean years of schooling 54.3 106.3 NA Female/male labor force participation rate 110.6 59.9 NA Seats held by women in national parliaments 39.6 45.7 NA Bold text highlights the score of the country (Mozambique or Nicaragua) that performs better on each indicator. Sources: EM 2030 (2019), OECD (2019), Sachs et al. (2019), UNDP (2018), and WEF (2018). Our assessment that the GII and GGGI do not Which is the best index? It depends capture women’s disempowerment suggests that The ﬁve gender indexes that we have reviewed the newer gender inequality indexes – SIGI, EM above vary enormously in focus, breadth and 230, and SDSN SDG 5 – should be better proxies for depth, and sophistication. Some indexes use indi- the targets on SDG 5. However, reliable and com- cators based on gaps between men and women; plete data are very hard to ﬁnd for many SDG 5 others look at women’s levels. Some indexes vary indicators, particularly those for marginalized with a country’s level of economic development, groups, and it will be years before longer time while others attempt to remove the relationship series datasets become available. Time series between gender inequality and the standard of indexes take time to build. We conclude that, at living. Some indexes are narrowly focused on least for the present, although the three new gender women at work, while others include many socio- indexes based on SDG 5 look very different on paper cultural and legal indicators designed to capture from the old gender inequality indexes (GII and broader issues of women’s empowerment. Some GGGI), the new indexes in practice are much closer indexes have long historical time-series datasets, while others are just beginning to ﬁnalize method- to the GII and GGGI, particularly for developing countries for which data for the SDG 5 targets and ologies, collect data, and report statistics on a cross- indicators are very scarce. Still, as these new section basis. Some indexes weight all their com- indexes mature, better evidence on women’s ponents equally, while others use unequal weights. empowerment should become available. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff So how can policymakers decide which of the ﬁve 2004: 3). While EBP has been primarily used in gender inequality indexes is best for tracking their OECD countries, EBP has also been applied in country’s performance on SDG 5? Similarly, how developing countries (Sutcliffe & Court, do MNE executives select an index to track their 2005, 2006; Bartlett, 2013; Hewlett Foundation, company’s gender equality performance, at home 2018). and in their foreign afﬁliates? We offer three The original approach to EBP assumes a linear insights into these questions. First, we argue that relationship between evidence and policy choice there is no single right answer. Policymakers and where the policymaker deﬁnes a problem, identiﬁes MNE executives need to match their selection of a what is known, collects the best available evidence, gender inequality index with the speciﬁc gender and makes a policy choice. The basic steps in EBP equality goals and targets they are trying to are outlined in Figure 1. The current approach to achieve. The ‘‘best’’ gender inequality index for EBP embeds evidence into the policy cycle process one government or one MNE may not be the same in a circular fashion, as shown in Figure 2. The EBP for another where their goals and targets differ. policy cycle starts with agenda setting, moves There may be no ‘‘best’’ index nor ‘‘off the shelf’’ through policy formulation, selection, and imple- solution; it may be that a single index is not mentation, to monitoring, evaluation, and revi- sufﬁcient and will need to be assembled from sion, in a circular fashion. different indexes. Second, policymakers and MNE Good evidence is a fundamental component of executives need to understand why and how the the EBP cycle. The key evidence steps in EBP are various indexes are constructed; that is, making a illustrated in the circled and bold text items in the ‘‘deep dive’’ into the selection and measurement of second box in Figure 1; the sub-steps in the indicators and construction of the indexes. A evidence collection phase are shown in the third thorough analysis of the various indexes is a box in Figure 1. The evidence steps are also high- necessary ﬁrst step to selecting or creating an lighted in Figure 2 as steps 5 (obtaining evidence), 7 inequality index that best ﬁts the organization. (interpreting evidence), 13 (monitoring), and 14 Third, our overall assessment is that, given their (evaluation). Thus, collecting, analyzing, and using strengths and weaknesses, the GII and GGGI are good evidence are key elements in successful EBP. better able to usefully inform policymakers and Wicked Problems and Evidence-Based MNE executives on how to move toward SDG 5 in Policymaking terms of workplace gender equality. For more Can EBP be applied successfully to WPs? One might holistic measures of gender equality that take think that EBP should be applicable to WPs, given account of women’s empowerment, policymakers that both the WP and EBP literatures have their must look to the new SDG 5 gender indexes. historical roots in the systems approach to plan- Policymakers should also study Hudson et al.’s ning. However, the WP literature arose as a critique (2020) new women’s disempowerment measure. of the systems approach, whereas the EBP literature adopted the systems approach and the policy cycle EVIDENCE-BASED POLICYMAKING as part of EBP. As a result, neither literature has had AND THE WICKED PROBLEM OF THE SDGS much to do with the other for the past 40 years We turn now to the second part of our analysis. (Head, 2019). Given the existing evidence on gender inequality, In fact, the WP literature has been very critical of how can policymakers use this evidence to address the EBP approach. WP scholars have long argued the WP of SDG 5? We contend that EBP is the that the rational, step-based approach to policy- appropriate response. making illustrated in Figure 2 is incapable of addressing policy problems that are ill-deﬁned, What is Evidence-Based Policymaking? complex, and amorphous (Newman & Head, The premise behind EBP is that policy decisions are 2017; Daviter, 2019; Head, 2019; Termeer et al., more likely to result in better outcomes when 2019). Because poorly structured problems cannot informed by evidence (Scott, 2005). EBP uses ‘‘open, be handled by ‘‘advanced and precise analytic smart and trusted statistics [that are] relevant for methods’’, EBP ‘‘will predictably fail to grapple with the society’’ (Rademacher, 2019: 524), and puts ‘‘the the challenge of wicked problems’’ (Daviter, 2019: best available evidence from research at the heart of 67). policy development and implementation’’ (Davies, Journal of International Business Policy POLICY FORMULATION Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Figure 2 Evidence-based AGENDA SETTING policymaking – a policy cycle approach. 1. Policy maker awareness of issue 2. Define policy problem, causes & needs 15. Modify and recalibrate policy 3. Identify knowledge gap 14. Evaluate policy using monitoring evidence 4. Set policy objectives 5. Obtain best available 13. Set up monitoring evidence procedures, measures and instruments 6. Consult with stakeholders 12. Implement projects & programs 7. Interpret evidence for policy context 11. Adopt regulations and procedures 8. Construct policy alternatives 10. Identify actors and roles 9. Select preferred policy option POLICY IMPLEMENTATION POLICY SELECTION EBP is also criticized for its implicit assumption and public management literatures for 40 years, that ‘‘access to better knowledge….will lead to WP theory would beneﬁt from reconnecting with greater consensus on how to improve policy out- these ﬁelds. He argues that WP theorists need to comes’’. WP scholars argue instead that ‘‘political ‘‘draw more deeply on cutting-edge developments dynamics… cannot be neutralized by a dose of in contemporary policy sciences’’, and that policy- evidence, no matter how relevant or powerful’’ makers need ‘‘to use best available evidence and to (Newman & Head, 2017: 419). WP scholars assert communicate the value of open processes for that policymaking is based, not on scientiﬁc evi- tackling complex and wicked problems’’ (Head, dence, but on ‘‘stakeholder perceptions, values and 2019: 192). Given ‘‘populist distain for expertise’’ interests in explaining how issues are scoped, and ‘‘widespread lack of trust in the institutions of priorities are set and possible solutions considered’’ public governance’’, Head (2019: 192) concludes (Head, 2019: 188). Politics drives policy, not evi- that WP theorists need to use ‘‘best available dence, according to WP theorists. As a result, the evidence.’’ WP literature has been critical of and has ignored At the same time, EBP scholars have also moved EBP for decades. away from the simple model in Figure 2, recogniz- We contend that EBP can provide useful insights ing that ‘‘it is a long away from getting the facts for addressing the WPs of the 2030 Agenda. Our straight to analyzing complex policy problems’’ thesis may appear overly optimistic, disingenuous, (Daviter, 2019: 70). In pluralistic societies, political or even radical, given the criticisms of EBP by WP dynamics and embeddedness can matter as much scholars noted above. We believe, however, that or more than evidence in an EBP process, even both literatures can inform each other and are when facing ‘‘tame’’ (technical or scientiﬁc) prob- particularly useful for analyzing the WP of the 2030 lems (Newman & Head, 2017). The current EBP Agenda. literature is also sensitive to several issues that are The timing may also be right for exploring inherent in WPs, such as complexity, uncertainty, connections between these two literatures. ambiguity, and divergence (Head & Alford, 2015). Recently, a few WP scholars have begun to take a Many ambiguities, for example, are likely involved second, more positive look at scientiﬁc approaches in applying EBP to a WP: ambiguities in framing and EBP. For example, Head (2019: 183) contends the issue (given interdependencies), determining that, after ignoring insights from the policy studies the evidence (sorting opinions from facts, deciding Journal of International Business Policy MONITORING, EVALUATION AND REVISION Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff what is relevant), selecting targets (that are typi- Moreover, evidence is generally assumed to be cally moving), selecting and implementing a policy synonymous with empirical evidence, with the or policies (which may have unintended conse- implicit assumption that ‘‘hard’’ evidence (ofﬁcial quences), and monitoring outcomes (relative to an statistics, econometrics, indexes) is more rigorous unknown counterfactual) (van Tulder, 2018: 43– than ‘‘soft’’ evidence (qualitative studies, expert 50). evaluations). However, empirical ﬁndings are typ- Given these trends, we believe that the time is ically built on mathematical models that involve right for exploring how insights from the WP and simpliﬁcation and parsimony, which suggests that EBP literatures could help devise appropriate public drawing policy recommendations from empirical policies for managing the WPs of the SDGs. results may not only be meaningless but potentially harmful. Saltelli and Giampietro (2017: 64) note Blending Insights from the EBP and WP that it is ‘‘one thing…to use a model to simulate a Literatures policy, another story is the leap whereby the same Below, we explore ﬁve insights drawn from the EBP model is used to justify one.’’ and WP literatures, which we believe could help Thus, the ﬁrst step in EBP, the collection and policymakers address the WP of the 2030 Agenda. provision of good evidence, is a necessary but onerous and contentious requirement for success- Insight #1: Good evidence is necessary ful EBP. Moreover, while collecting, building, and but not sufﬁcient analyzing ‘‘good evidence’’ are necessary steps, they The proper application of EBP requires the creation are not sufﬁcient. A successful EBP process needs to and use of good evidence, which raises method- recognize and account for factors other than ological questions among stakeholders over ‘‘what evidence that inﬂuence the policy process. Aware- is evidence’’ and how to make it accessible to ness of these potential problems is critically impor- policymakers. High-quality evidence is deﬁned as tant for governments and MNE executives as they the ‘‘best available’’ evidence that is appropriate for attempt to choose and implement the WP of the the problem and has been ‘‘systematically searched, 2030 Agenda. critically appraised, and rigorously analysed accord- ing to explicit and transparent criteria’’ (Davies, Insight #2: Good evidence may be misunderstood 2004: 7). Most EBP scholars agree that all forms of or misused by policymakers evidence collected through a systematic process Even though the adage ‘‘better statistics, better should be included, e.g., theory building, data decision-making’’ is widely accepted, there can be collection, and analysis, and practice-based wisdom ‘‘slips between the cup and the lip’’ that derail an (Sutcliffe & Court, 2006: 2). At the other end of the EBP process. Policymakers may be ‘‘ﬂying blind: scale, EBP scholars also agree that using poor- trying to make policy decisions in the dark’’, even quality research as evidence clearly reduces the when good evidence exists, if the evidence cannot efﬁcacy of EBP. be found, or is misunderstood (Hewlett Founda- However, once we move past these two zones of tion, 2018: 3). agreement (what is in/what is out), disputes emerge For example, high-quality evidence may not be because the ‘‘devil is in the details.’’ A ﬁrst problem sufﬁcient to motivate policymakers if they do not is that deﬁnitions of what constitutes appropriate have the policy capacity or level of expertise evidence can vary across stakeholders, ranging needed to understand or use the evidence (New- from narrow (e.g., peer-reviewed academic journal man, Cherney, & Head, 2017). Successful EBP articles) to broad (e.g., professional experience, requires the government sector to have skilled stakeholder accounts). Stakeholders also disagree analytical staff that are trained in data analysis on what constitutes evidence in different issue and policy evaluation (Head, 2010). The level of areas. Nutley, Davies and Walter (2003: 31–32), for training and professional competence of civil ser- example, note that health care has an ‘‘established vants and government legislators varies across hierarchy of evidence for assessing what works’’; countries, along with their access to resources and whereas ﬁelds such as education and criminal institutional infrastructure. Policy capacity is typi- justice are ‘‘riven with disputes’’ over what is cally much lower in developing than in developed appropriate evidence. countries (Howes, Betteridge, Sause, & Ugyel, 2017). Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Misuse and misunderstanding of research ﬁnd- (Davies, 2004; Head, 2010; De Marchi, Lucertini, ings by policymakers can also be caused by the & Tsoukia ` s, 2016; Richards, 2017; Saltelli & researchers themselves, who seldom consider ‘‘pol- Giampietro, 2017). icymaker friendliness’’ when disseminating their In theory, the selection and measurement of research ﬁndings. Researchers need to communi- targets and indicators for building good evidence cate well to ‘‘make their research relevant and should be decisions made on technical or scientiﬁc readable’’ (Oliver & Cairney, 2019: 3). There are also grounds. In practice, the evidence collection stage multiple ways in which numbers can be misunder- can become a highly contested, political activity stood or misinterpreted, creating ‘‘mutant statis- because the measurement tools are essential to tics’’ that lead to bad policymaking (Best, 2012). deﬁning the goals (Fukuda-Parr & McNeill, 2018). Examples include problems of generalizability, def- Getting appropriate ‘‘buy-in’’ from politicians inition, inadequate measurement, bad samples, and bureaucrats to using EBP can also be difﬁcult. changing the meaning of statistics, garbling com- ‘‘[P]ractitioners need incentives to use evidence and plex statistics, and compounding errors by creating to do things that have been shown to be effective. chains of bad statistics. To prevent such technical This also means not doing things that have been biases, new institutions for good governance of shown to be ineffective or even harmful’’ (Davies, evidence may be needed if EBP is to function 2004: 20). Policymakers must have the capability, effectively (Parkhurst, 2017). opportunity, and motivation to use evidence before It is also possible that the specialized knowledge they engage in behavioral change (Langer, Tripney, of academics can be counterproductive, creating & Gough, 2016: 4). Outside events, such as pressing contentious debates over highly technical alterna- but unqualiﬁed threats, can also cause policymak- tives among experts on different sides of the ers to ‘‘throw caution to the wind’’, ignore evidence, problem. The uncertainty of social science and and make quick, precautionary decisions (Mon- the different status of knowledge ﬁelds can cause aghan, Pawson, & Wicker, 2012). Arguing that policymakers to doubt or refuse to include partic- evidence should prevail over pragmatism is difﬁcult ular studies as evidence, leading to disputes for politicians where politics and budget con- between policymaking groups. Where WPs are straints are likely to be more important than involved, there may be equally compelling evi- evidence in driving policymaking (Richards, 2017). dence that supports competing perspectives, caus- These political realities at every stage in the EBP ing stakeholders to privilege the evidence that process accord well with the concerns of WP favors their own position (Daviter, 2019: 67). A theorists. One of the core insights of the WP related concern is the politicization of science literature is that the political arena is the true whereby policymakers bury, misuse, manipulate, battleﬁeld in policymaking because public policy or cherry-pick evidence to support and promote problems are inherently political problems (New- their own policy preferences. EBP can be turned man & Head, 2017; Head, 2019). As the wickedness into policy-based evidence, generated by mecha- of a problem increases, conﬂicts among stakehold- nisms such as knowledge monopolization, blame ers with differing values become more important avoidance, black-boxing, or oversimpliﬁcation of and the usefulness of scientiﬁc evidence the evidence (Strassheim & Kettunen, 2014: 263). diminishes. Insight #3: Good evidence is often trumped by politics Insight #4: Good evidence needs networks While EBP scholars stress the role played by good and partnerships evidence, they also recognize that exogenous and Networks and partnerships among the various endogenous factors other than evidence are regu- stakeholders in EBP – government, business, non- governmental organizations (NGOs), policy think larly – and legitimately – involved in policymaking. Examples include the experience, expertise, and tanks, academics, and the general public – are judgment of policymakers; the constraints of ﬁnite necessary for successful EBP, particularly in demo- resources; the importance of values such as ideol- cratic systems and when dealing with WPs (Ney & Verweij, 2015; Crowley & Head, 2017; Daviter, ogy and political beliefs and the role of habit and 2017; Termeer & Dewulf, 2019). Partnerships are tradition; the power exerted by lobbyists, pressure groups, and consultants; and, more generally, the ‘‘voluntary and collaborative relationships between pragmatics and contingencies of political life various parties, both State and non-State, in which all participants agree to work together to achieve a Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff common purpose or undertake a speciﬁc task and successfully implementing EBP in developing coun- to share risks and responsibilities, resources and tries are likely to be large, possibly much larger than beneﬁts’’ (UN, 2005, par. 8, p. 4). those found in case studies of EBP in OECD Partnerships between government policymakers countries (Sutcliffe & Court, 2005, 2006; Bartlett, and their stakeholders can offer beneﬁts, such as 2013; Hewlett Foundation, 2018). access to resources, capacity and coalition building, Only a few developing countries have embraced more policy relevant research, and linkages with and attempted to implement EBP; for example, stakeholders (Richards, 2017). EBP is more likely to Malawi (Government of Malawi, 2016) and Tanza- be successful when the ‘‘actors in the evidence-to- nia (Lubua & Maharaj, 2012). The reasons for why policy ecosystem…..have regular opportunities to EBP initiatives have failed in developing countries connect with each other, develop relationships of include the application of orthodox approaches mutual trust and respect, and exchange ideas and inappropriate to countries at different stages of learning’’ (Hewlett Foundation, 2018: 8). development, weaker economic conditions and Academics and policymakers have historically more difﬁcult political environments (e.g., political been viewed as ‘‘two communities’’ with few con- volatility, corruption), and institutional voids (Data tacts and bridges, either formal or informal, for African Development Working Group, 2014; between them (Caplan, 1979). While evidence Hewlett Foundation, 2018). Even where interna- suggests the situation is better now than in the tional organizations have developed EBP ‘‘tool- 1970s (Newman, Cherney, & Head, 2016), it is still boxes or kits’’ for developing countries, a common the case that factors which could encourage net- concern is that the toolkits may be ideologically- working, such as knowledge brokers, shared agen- based, promoting orthodox policies inappropriate das, and common meeting places (e.g., joint for countries at different stages of development conferences), are often missing or weak (Lugo-Gil, (Sutcliffe & Court, 2005, 2006; European Commis- Jean-Baptiste, & Livia Frasso Jaramillo, 2019). For sion, 2017b). The heterogeneity of developing example, academic scholars are seldom motivated economies also makes it difﬁcult to translate the to work on policy issues nor encouraged to dissem- lessons from EBP case studies carried out in one inate their research ﬁndings in ways that reach developing country to another because the envi- policymakers or to interact in policy circles. The ronmental contexts are so different. ‘‘publish-or-perish’’ syndrome and the rewards sys- Even for a single developing country, the hurdles tems in universities do not privilege policy-based can be interactive and reinforce one another. A research or reward linkages between government particularly difﬁcult ‘‘cocktail’’ is the mix of poor and academia, viewing them as consulting or evidence, political realities, and weak academic– secondary contributions to knowledge (Eden, Lund policymaker networks (Hantrais, Lenihan, & Dean, & Vaaler, 2018, Chapter 28). Academics MacGregor, 2015). While there is some research need to learn the ‘‘dos and don’ts’’ of how to on how to successfully apply EBP in developing inﬂuence policy (Oliver & Cairney, 2019). For country contexts (see, e.g., the Overseas Develop- expert advice to be helpful, academic experts may ment Institute’s RAPID Framework; Sutcliffe & also need to be more formally embedded in the Court, 2005, 2006; Court & Young, 2006), clearly policymaking process and able to think ‘‘outside the hurdles are higher and the success stories fewer the box’’ of their own discipline and specialty in number. (Daviter, 2019). Problems at the single country level are com- pounded in a multi-country framework where Insight #5: Good evidence here may not work there attempting to implement EBP generates huge A concern particularly salient for IB scholars arises coordination issues. Examples are Bartlett’s (2013) from the difﬁculty of applying EBP in different study of the hurdles faced by applying EBP to labor- country settings. Context matters, and ‘‘what works skill policies in the EU enlargement countries and here may not work there.’’ A simple but telling Lofstedt & Schlag’s (2017) study of the debate over example is the need for and difﬁculty of adapting banning the chemical Bisphenol A in the European policies that work in OECD countries to the very Union. different and differing institutional contexts of The problems of applying EBP to multiple coun- developing economies. While EBP has been used tries are even more acute in developing countries. A mostly in OECD countries, most EBP experts useful (and timely, given the current COVID-19 agree that the potential economic gains from pandemic) analysis of the challenges is the study by Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Andrus, Jauregui, De Oliveria and Ruiz Matus UN Women has been actively leading the process (2011) of the Pan American Health Organization’s for SDG 5, working with PARIS21, a worldwide ProVac Initiative in the Americas, which was network of statisticians and other stakeholders that designed to ensure that developing countries had are committed to EBP in the public sector. Their equitable access to new vaccines. The authors goal is to develop better gender statistics through found that more lives were saved more quickly assessing country-level data and statistical capacity when national governments had sufﬁcient policy gaps, with the ultimate goal of using these assess- capacity, took responsibility for helping to pay for ments to develop better strategies for national and distribute the vaccines, and were supported by statistics (UN, 2013, 2016; UN Women and strong partnerships with international PARIS21, 2019). UN Women (2018, 2019a) has set organizations. up a Women Count Data Hub with an SDGs In sum, ‘‘what works there may not work here’’ Dashboard (https://data.unwomen.org/countries) reminds us that an EBP approach to WPs will be where raw data are posted and analyzed, by coun- particularly difﬁcult in multi-country cases with try, for as many of the SDG indicators as possible. multiple stakeholders and wide differences in The OECD is also heavily involved in the SDGs institutional contexts and levels of development. project, providing ‘‘snapshots’’ of OECD member Top–down, ‘‘one size ﬁts all’’ policies – even where countries and their performance on the SDGs (see, the deﬁnition of success is tackling, managing or e.g., OECD, 2018). Once SDG 5’s targets and indi- coping – are unlikely to be accepted or successful. cators are ﬁnalized, governments and intergovern- mental agencies have committed to collecting and reporting statistics annually (UN Statistics Division, POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS UNSD, 2020; UN, 2015b; Allen et al., 2018). Socio- FOR THE WICKED PROBLEM OF SDG 5 demographic statistics are to be collected on As we have shown above, determining what is and everyone, including marginalized populations (e.g., how to use high-quality evidence in an EBP frame- the homeless, migrants, minorities, and the work is far from easy and especially difﬁcult where underground economy) that are typically difﬁcult WPs are involved. Despite these difﬁculties, we or impossible to track. Data collection so far has argue that policymakers can beneﬁt from applying been difﬁcult, and less than half the SDG indicators the EBP and WP literatures to the WPs of the SDGs. are high quality and many are completely Drawing on these insights, we make some policy missing. recommendations for governments and MNEs for The activities above involving SDG 5 are steps in addressing the WP of SDG 5 Gender Equality. the ‘‘evidence collection’’ stage of an EBP process. As Figure 1 shows, once a goal has been deﬁned, SDG 5 Policy Recommendations for Governments the policymaker selects targets and indicators, identiﬁes data sources, and assigns data collection Recommendation #1: Formally adopt EBP roles and responsibilities. Where multiple entities and prioritize completion of evidence collection are involved, a central entity typically coordinates The UN recognized early in the multi-stakeholder and oversees the process by creating ex ante negotiations led to the 2030 Agenda that ‘‘good protocols, manuals, and training materials to guide quality, veriﬁable evidence on progress toward collection, and by ex post cleaning, merging, and achieving the 2030 Agenda’’ would be necessary, analyzing the submitted data. The last step is the together with a formal monitoring and evaluation generation and dissemination of the results. mechanism to ensure accountability and bench- Evidence collection occurs early in the EBP mark country progress (MacFeely, 2019b: 3). Imple- process. Why, in May 2020, 5 years after the SDGs mentation of the 2030 Agenda was to be based on were launched, are UN agencies and Member States ‘‘sound evidence and science, taking advantage of still in the evidence-gathering stage for SDG 5 ? contemporary approaches from the sustainability The slow progress appears to have multiple causes. sciences including systems thinking and analysis UN Women (2018: 54) lists three problems: the and quantitative modelling’’ (Allen, Metternicht, & uneven coverage of gender indicators across goals Wiedmann, 2018: 1454). Thus, the United Nations and targets, the absence of internationally agreed in 2015 implicitly, if not explicitly, recognized the standards for data collection, and the uneven importance of evidence and made a commitment availability of gender statistics across countries to an EBP process for the 2030 Agenda. and over time. The existing gender inequality Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff indexes, the GII and GGGI, were not closely tied to The UN has worked for many years to ensure the broader targets and indicators of SDG 5 so new independence and impartiality of ofﬁcial statistics indexes had to be created; data collection for the through the UN Fundamental Principles of Ofﬁcial new metrics has been hampered by lack of estab- Statistics and UN Statistical Quality Assurance lished methodologies for collecting and measuring Frameworks (UN-SQAF, 2018). Only ofﬁcial or the indicators. accredited statistical agencies that supply ofﬁcial A second reason why SDG 5 is still in the statistics are currently acceptable sources of data for evidence collection phase is that national govern- the SDG indicators (MacFeely & Nastav, 2019). ments have failed to mainstream gender by not Imagine a 2 9 2 matrix with Agency (ofﬁcial/ prioritizing gender statistics and/or by having weak accredited vs. non-ofﬁcial/non-accredited) on one and under-resourced statistical agencies (Thomas, side and Data Source (ofﬁcial/accredited vs. non- Cordova Novion, de Haan, de Leo ´ n, Forest, & Iyer, ofﬁcial/non-accredited) on the other side. The UN’s 2018; UN, 2016; UN Women, 2018). Resource current rules and procedures limit evidence collec- constraints on statistical agencies are likely to be tion for the SDGs to only one of the four cells in the even more important given the coronavirus pan- 2 9 2 box: ofﬁcial/accredited agencies and ofﬁcial/ demic and the global recession now underway. accredited data sources. Given that the lack of data A third causal factor is that selection and measure- for many SDG indicators has slowed down com- ment of targets and indicators becomes a political pletion of the data collection stage, we support activity when WPs are involved (Fukuda-Parr & proposals to – carefully – open up and include McNeill, 2018). Politics can affect evidence collection agencies and data sources in the other cells of the in terms of, for example, determining priorities 2 9 2 matrix. within complex targets, handling country composi- We recommend that UN statistical agencies tion changes over time, deciding which entities should push forward rapidly on expanding their (national or international) are responsible for provid- partnering to include non-ofﬁcial partners, as ing data, and allocating the ﬁnancial costs of mea- argued in MacFeely (2019b) and MacFeely and surement (MacFeely, 2019b). Governments may also Nastav (2019). UN Women could, for example, be unwilling to collect and provide gender-related build on the unrealized potential in DATA2x, the data to an international agency, especially govern- collaborative technical and advocacy platform at ments with poor records on gender equality, which https://data2x.org/, which is estimating gaps in may prefer to hide or tamper with their statistics, gender data, ﬁnding potential sources, and col- fearing the reputational risks (UN Women, 2018). lecting data (Buvinic & Levine, 2015; Buvinic et al., Our assessment is that SDG 5 needs more 2014). momentum. The evidence collection phase needs We also support recent proposals that unofﬁcial completion and the process needs to move forward data and statistics, both national and international, on other steps in the EBP process. We therefore be certiﬁed and used as sources (MacFeely, 2019a; recommend that the UN and UN Women ﬁrst MacFeely & Nastav, 2019). Expansion of accept- commit explicitly and publicly to an EBP approach able data metrics is particularly important for to SDG 5 and, second, prioritize completion of the developing countries where policy capacity and evidence collection phase. The symbolic effect of a resources are limited. ‘‘Big data’’ could prove to be a formal restatement of commitment to EBP we more cost-effective, efﬁcient, and ﬁne-grained data believe would be useful for all stakeholders in the source than ofﬁcial sources and of better quality process. The commitment would also raise aware- than survey data (MacFeely, 2019a). For example, ness among stakeholders of the need to set up DATA2x provides several fascinating case studies of formal milestones and to prioritize completion of gender inequalities, which were done using big the evidence collection phase in the EBP process. data in developing countries (DATA2x, 2017, 2019). Recommendation #2: Expand the role of partnering In order to expand partnering in terms of agen- in evidence collection cies and data sources, the UN and its statistical Our second policy recommendation is that the UN agencies will need to be more open to using and UN Women expand their partnering arrange- unofﬁcial routes for SDG indicators (MacFeely, ments so they can move faster on the evidence 2019a; MacFeely & Nastav, 74). We therefore also collection phase for SDG 5. We recommend expan- sion both in terms of partners and data sources. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff support a rapid certiﬁcation process whereby unof- address the complexity and conﬂict inherent in ﬁcial agencies and data sources can be accepted by WPs. Our modiﬁcation contends that PPPs can also the UN speciﬁcally for the SDG indicators. bring together ‘‘three lenses’’ on evidence: scientiﬁc (academics, scientists), political (government poli- Recommendation #3: Build public–private cymakers and bureaucrats), and practical imple- partnerships for the long-term stages of EBP mentation (MNEs) knowledge, to deal with the WP Generating high-quality good evidence for SDG 5 is of SDG 5. We explore this idea below. only the ﬁrst step in the EBP process. Governments must also mobilize and allocate resources to the Policy Recommendations for Multinational achievement of gender equality. This means prior- Enterprises itizing gender-responsive investments, policies, and Recommendation #1: Commit to a global corporate programs. Implementation, monitoring, and social responsibility strategy accountability are also needed. These next steps How MNE executives view the role of business in in the EBP process are likely to be very difﬁcult for society has changed signiﬁcantly over the years the UN and its Member States, for at least three (Bull & Miklian, 2019; Eden, 2020). Deﬁnitions of reasons. First, short-run dislocation costs caused by social issues and corporate social responsibility the COVID-19 pandemic and global recession will (CSR) have broadened signiﬁcantly as the social make it difﬁcult for governments to prioritize and responsibility of business has evolved from its fund gender equality initiatives. A second, longer- historical goal of ‘‘do no harm’’ to the more activist term reason is that the SDGs are a goal-based role of ‘‘doing good.’’ More recently, CSR scholars institution built on soft international law with little have found that MNEs, in particular the largest to no enforceability. ‘‘As a non-binding political ones are moving from ‘‘doing good’’ to ‘‘going commitment, the 2030 Agenda lacks enforceability. above and beyond’’ mandated levels of government There are no deﬁned consequences if countries fail social policies (Eden, 2020; Schlegelmilch & Szocs, to make serious efforts to meet the goals and 2020). Simply meeting government CSR regula- targets’’ (UN Women, 2018: 257). The third reason tions is no longer viewed as a differentiating factor; is simply that SDG 5 is a WP where politics may MNEs must exceed mandated levels of social and trump evidence. environmental activities to build a reputation and How can national governments move forward on positively affect their ﬁnancial performance (Miller, the policy implementation, monitoring, and eval- Eden, & Li, 2020). uation stages of the EBP cycle to address the WP of The 2030 Agenda provides an opportunity for SDG 5? We argue that a key requirement will be MNE executives to rethink their CSR strategies. We that governments build successful partnerships recommend that MNE executives shift from view- with other stakeholders, in particular with multi- ing CSR as a stand-alone activity located in their national enterprises. Public–private partnerships marketing departments to recognizing that CSR is (PPPs) with MNEs will be critical, for example, in an activity that can and should be linked strategi- developing and implementing ﬁrm-level policies cally and dynamically to the MNE’s overall global for gender equality and empowerment of women in strategy (Eden, 2020; Schlegelmilch & Szo ¨ cs, 2020). the workplace. Potential beneﬁts from partnering This new role should include building a commit- with other stakeholders include knowledge-sharing ment to global CSR into the MNE’s goals, scope, and capacity building, mobilization of resources, rules of engagement, capabilities, and management and achievement of joint goals through collabora- systems. Making a commitment to at least 1 of the tion (Bull & McNeill, 2019). 17 SDGs should be a core component of the global Our commitment to PPPs as a solution to the corporate social strategy for every MNE. ‘‘evidence using’’ stages of an EBP approach to the 2030 Agenda builds on the three evidence ‘‘lenses’’ Recommendation #2: Build public–private in Head (2008): scientiﬁc knowledge (the research- partnerships for the 2030 Agenda based knowledge of specialists), political knowledge The 2030 Agenda is a new form of global gover- (the know-how, analysis and judgment of political nance by goal setting (van Zanten & van Tulder, actors), and practical implementation knowledge 2018; Bull & McNeill, 2019). The agenda offers an (the wisdom and practices of government bureau- opportunity for MNEs to use PPPs as a vehicle for crats). Head (2008) argues that viewing evidence solidifying a new role for business in society. MNEs, more broadly as three lenses can help policymakers Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff especially large MNEs with a global footprint, can Agenda. Given that the SDGs are voluntary goals be proactive agents of change that can serve society without formal binding commitments or penalties, and address global problems (Kolk, Kourula, & each MNE has the ﬂexibility to select from among Pisani, 2017; van Tulder, 2018). We therefore the ‘‘menu’’ or ‘‘smorgasbord’’ of the 17 SDGs, recommend that MNEs work pro-actively with UN prioritizing/ignoring and spending/not spending agencies and national governments through PPPs on the SDGs’ multiple targets and indicators, as the to further the 2030 Agenda. ﬁrm’s executives so choose (van Zanten & van MNEs have been partnering with international Tulder, 2018). organizations at least as far back as 1946 when the Our proposed framework builds on the EBP International Chamber of Commerce was given policy cycle in Figure 2 with the key difference consultative status at the United Nations (Seitz, that the EBP approach is applied to MNE decision- 2019). PPPs began to play a major role in MNE–state making. We call our framework the SDG Material- relations starting in the late 1990s (Bull & McNeill, ity Matrix because a key component of the matrix is 2019). For example, over the past 20 years, the the analysis of both ex ante and ex post materiality primary forum for UN–business networking has of SDG targets to the MNE. The concept of mate- been the UN Global Compact (UNGC), initiated in riality reﬂects the impact of a decision on a ﬁrm or 1999 by UN Secretary-General Koﬁ Annan. Other actor; materiality analysis is designed to determine industry groups have also formed to support the ‘‘what really matters to company sustainability SDGs; for example, the World Business Council for performance, commitment and strategies’’ (Cal- Sustainable Development (WDCSD, 2017, 2018) abrese, Costa, Ghiron, & Menichini, 2017: 440; whose members are primarily large MNEs. Bellantuono, Pontrandolfo, & Scozzi, 2018). Mate- The 2030 Agenda provides many opportunities for riality analyses are typically carried out on an ex MNEs to work with national governments and post basis, assessing the performance of the MNE’s international NGOs. Van Zanten and van Tulder CSR activities. Here, we expand the concept to (2018: 226), in their study of MNE engagement with include both ex ante and ex post estimates of the SDGs, found that MNEs were using PPPs where materiality of SDG targets to the MNE. We argue the SDGs were complex and externally actionable, that MNE executives can use our SDG Materiality notably, SDG 1 (no poverty), SDG 2 (zero hunger), Matrix to develop their internal evidence-based and SDG 4 (quality education). While PPPs and policies, ﬁrst, for creating and disseminating good strategic alliances are costly, they enable resource evidence for the SDGs, and second, for policy collaboration and knowledge-sharing beneﬁts that design and implementation of SDG policies inside often cannot be achieved by ﬁrms on their own. their organizations. We illustrate our SDG Materi- We recommend that MNEs use PPPs especially for ality Matrix in Figure 3. Given the huge number of the evidence collection stage for the SDGs, in SDG targets and indicators, we recommend that particular for SDG 5. The UN has asked businesses SDG target selection by the MNE should be based to partner with governments and NGOs to build on four factors: Quality of evidence for the target, more robust statistical indexes for the SDGs (Busi- Salience of the target to the MNE, Actionability of ness for 2030, 2020). There will be some targets and the target by the MNE, and Ethicality of the target indicators where the private sector has better and for the MNE. more direct access to data than governments (e.g., An EBP approach starts with the requirement of SDG 5 data on wages and salaries, access to good evidence. Thus, quality – the ‘‘best available childcare and maternity leave policies, and share evidence’’ – for each SDG in terms of its targets and of women in management and leadership roles). its indicators is the ﬁrst factor in our SDG Materi- These are areas where MNEs can play a powerful ality Matrix. MNE executives should start by map- role in improving gender statistics in the evidence ping and assessing the 17 SDGs and their targets collection stage, particularly where statistical agen- and indicators, for example, by consulting the most cies are weak. recent edition of the E-Handbook on the SDGs (UNSD, 2020). Summaries of available datasets Recommendation #3: Adopt an EBP approach and questions are also provided in GRI and the to the wicked problem of the 2030 Agenda UN Global Compact (2017) and UNSD (2020). Our third recommendation is that MNEs adopt an Our second factor is the salience of the evidence EBP approach to selecting and implementing their for the MNE. We argue that salience has two own CSR strategy for engagement with the 2030 components: ﬁt and materiality. In terms of ﬁt, Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff we argue that MNE executives should prioritize regional/global, country, industry, or ﬁrm level. SDG targets based on their relevance to and ﬁt with The second component is the type of action required the MNE’s core business purpose (Szocs & Sch- by the SDG target. Addressing the target could legelmilch, 2020). The MNE’s corporate goals for require the MNE to engage in actionability through performance (market, ﬁnancial, and social) and market-based actions (e.g., new products), opera- organizational legitimacy must also be considered tional actions (e.g., processes and value chains), or (Donoher, 2017; Terpstra-Tong, 2017). The MNE regulatory actions (e.g., standard-setting) (Szo ¨ cs & should also consider existing in-house programs Schlegelmilch, 2020). The third component of (e.g., CSR activities) and how the SDG target would actionability – actors – addresses which entity or ﬁt with the MNE’s capabilities (Szo ¨ cs & Sch- entities are responsible for the actions and what legelmilch, 2020) and CSR programs (Scho ¨ nherr, roles they play. Both target scope and action type Findler, & Martinuzzi, 2017). should affect the choice of actors and roles. For The second component of salience is materiality example, if the target is actionable at the ﬁrm level, of the SDG target to the MNE. Here, we recommend the MNE can, but does not have to, move on its that MNE executives estimate the expected beneﬁts own to address the target. Targets aimed at the and costs (both private and social) from acting on industry are likely to require partnering with ﬁrms the SDG target, the likely impact on ﬁrm perfor- in the same industry. Targets at the national or mance, and in what ways the SDG target is relevant international levels are more likely to require PPPs to the MNE’s internal and external stakeholders. and alliances with NGOs. Similarly, standard-set- How, for example, would adopting the SDG target ting actions may need industry alliances or PPPs, likely affect the MNE’s exports and imports, whereas new product launches can be done inside employment, foreign direct investment (FDI), and the MNE. global value chains? Based on an assessment of ﬁt Our last factor in the SDG Materiality Matrix is and materiality, the MNE can determine which ethicality of the target, which is the level of effort SDG targets have the greatest salience. that the MNE chooses for the SDG target. Here, we Our third factor is actionability by the MNE, consider two components: the standard or norm which has three components: target scope, action embedded in the SDG target and the MNE’s choice type, and actors (we expect the three components of compliance level. First, SDG targets can be to be interdependent). The ﬁrst component is target written as either proscriptive (‘‘do not harm’’) or scope; that is, whether the target is aimed at the prescriptive (‘‘do good’’) norms or standards, which Figure 3 The SDG Materiality Matrix applied to SDG 5 SALIENCE ETHICALITY QUALITY ACTIONABILITY Gender Equality. Goals SDG 5 FIT NORM SCOPE Indicators � No Harm/Do Good � Core Bus Purpose � Regional/Global SDG 5 � Soft/Hard Law � Corporate Goals � Country Targets � Org Legitimacy � Industry SDG 1 � Performance SDG 2 �Firm � Capabilities SDG 3 � Existing Programs I 1 SDG 4 T 1 I 2 ACTION COMPLIANCE T 2 I 3 SDG 5 T 3 I 4 � Market Driven � Level � Operational SDG 6 � Symbolic � Regulatory MATERIALITY � Compliant � Substantive � Estimated Benefit/Cost � Materiality �Private ACTORS � Monitoring T 9 � Industry � Assessment I13 �MNE �Society � Reporting I14 � Parent � Performance Impact � Affiliates SDG 17 � Stakeholder Impact � Partnerships � Internal � Other MNEs � External � PPPs �NGOs Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff can also be either voluntary or mandatory. Where both in terms of ﬁt and materiality; see, for the standard is mandatory, additional issues example, Accenture (2019), Ike, Donovan, Topple involve enforceability and sanctioning. Because and Masli (2019), PwC (2016), and WBCSD (2018). the SDGs are ‘‘soft’’ law, only the ﬁrst component In terms of actionability, we recommend that (prescriptive or proscriptive behavior) is at issue MNEs should focus, ﬁrst, on the collection and here. The second component of ethicality is the dissemination of internal evidence on SDG 5 and, MNE’s chosen level of compliance with the standard: second, on designing and implementing internal below (symbolic), at (compliant), or above (sub- policies to foster gender equality. MNEs that adopt stantive) the norm (Miller et al., 2020). We also SDG 5 as one of their key social strategies need to consider the materiality of the MNE’s engagement mainstream gender in their organizations and set with the SDG target in terms of monitoring, impact up EBP management and reporting systems to assessment, and reporting to governments and ensure implementation (Thomas et al., 2018). other stakeholders (Calabrese et al., 2017; Bellan- We also recommend that the MNE’s workplace, tuono et al., 2018). Note that, while the salience for the purposes of SDG 5, be deﬁned as including factor assesses materiality on an ex ante basis, the all domestic and foreign afﬁliates. This does not ethicality factor does the same on an ex post basis. imply that the exact same gender equality policies The four factors in our SDG Materiality Matrix for must apply throughout the MNE group on a MNE engagement with the SDGs have their direct worldwide basis. Given the large differences across parallels in the EBP policy cycle recommended for countries in both gender inequality antecedents government policymakers. As Figure 2 shows, given and outcomes, a proactive and substantive strategy the best available evidence, policymakers should will be a difﬁcult, expensive, and contentious consult with stakeholders, interpret the evidence undertaking (Terpstra-Tong, 2017). EBP predicts for the context, select their preferred option(s), that top–down strategies based on global integra- determine the actors and their roles, implement the tion are likely to fail when ‘‘what works here does policies, and monitor and assess performance. not work there.’’ We therefore recommend a bot- tom–up, locally responsive approach. MNEs should Recommendation #4: Use the SDG materiality matrix build partnerships with key stakeholders at the to mainstream gender equality country level (e.g., employees, governments, sup- We hypothesize that MNEs will prioritize at least pliers and buyers, civil society) and use the part- some SDG 5 targets and indicators as part of their nerships to develop appropriate country-based global CSR strategy. Below, we apply the SDG gender equality policies. MNEs should also address Materiality Matrix to explore how this can be done. ‘‘missing links’’, such as second- and third-tier In terms of selecting evidence based on its suppliers that often ‘‘ﬂy below the radar’’ in (non)- quality, we argue that businesses are best placed compliance with the lead ﬁrm’s and ﬁrst-tier sup- to ‘‘make a difference’’ if they select targets that pliers’ CSR initiatives (Serdijn, Kolk, & Fransen, focus on gender equality and empowering women 2020). The commitment to mainstreaming gender in the workplace. In terms of indicators, we recom- equality throughout the MNE group should be, mend that MNEs start with the GII and GGGI initially, to ‘‘go above and beyond’’ country-level rather than the newer SDG gender indexes to assess requirements for gender equality and, in the longer and design policies for addressing the gender term, to ‘‘lift all boats’’ to the highest common inequality gaps in their organizations. As we have denominator across the MNE’s local and foreign argued above, the GII and GGGI are better mea- afﬁliates. sures (at least at present) of workplace gender Lastly, in terms of ethicality, assuming MNEs do inequalities than the newer indexes. MNEs should prioritize SDG 5, what norm should they adopt – do use metrics from the GII and GGGI to collect and no harm or do good – and what level and materi- monitor their own internal statistics on gender ality? Van Zanten and van Tulder (2018) hypoth- equality and empowerment. esized that good citizens (including MNEs) would In terms of salience, van Zanten and van Tulder be more likely to choose compliance with expected (2018: 220) report that MNE engagement with the norms. Assuming that a ‘‘do good’’ standard is more SDGs has been ‘‘particularly high’’ for SDG 5. Their costly than a ‘‘no harm’’ standard, the authors result accords with other literature on the impor- found that MNEs preferred SDG targets with ‘‘no tance and salience of gender equality to business harm’’ standards. On the other hand, if MNE executives view CSR as a socially responsible Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff contract with their stakeholders, the executives are Our paper makes several contributions to the IB more likely to choose pro-active levels of engage- literature. First, to the best of our knowledge, there ment with the SDG targets (Eden, 2020; Sch- have been no articles in Journal of International legelmilch & Szo ¨ cs, 2020). There is also empirical Business Policy (JIBP)or Journal of International evidence that MNEs that ‘‘go above and beyond’’ Business Studies (JIBS) on WPs or EBP. A keyword mandated CSR levels earn a positive reputation, search of JIBS and JIBP failed to ﬁnd a single article which positively affects ﬁrm performance (Miller on either topic. We believe both frameworks offer et al., 2020). We therefore expect MNEs to beneﬁt much value added for thinking about IB policies from positive reputation gains that come from and problems. IB theory has a long history of exceeding government mandates in terms of their adopting insights from other disciplines. We hope global CSR strategies. We therefore recommend that our work will encourage other IB scholars to that MNEs commit publicly to exceeding national use these theoretical frameworks for their own standards as they mainstream gender equality research topics. throughout their organizations. We contribute to the EBP literature by expanding Finally, adopting SDG 5 as a corporate social it in three different contexts: ﬁrst, from the single- strategy also involves dissemination to others and country (domestic) level to the multi-country level reporting standards. The most common of these are of the 2030 Agenda; second, by applying EBP to the CSR reports (Eden, 2020;Schonherr et al., 2017); problem of gender inequality; and third, by devel- other examples for how to build SDG 5 activities oping a EBP for multinational enterprises in our into corporate reports can be found in GRI and new SDG Materiality Matrix. In addition, we con- UNGC (2018). In addition, MNE CEOs are now tribute to the WP literature by applying it to SDG being asked to publicly sign and post the seven gender equality, building on O’Brien et al. (2017). Women’s Empowerment Principles, designed to We also bring together two literatures – WPs and mainstream gender in business organizations (UN EBP – that historically have had little to do with Women, 2019). When CEOs of large MNEs com- one another, and show that they can usefully mit to making gender equality a top strategic inform each other. Our work here builds on Daviter priority for their organizations, the positive signal- (2019) and Head (2019). ing effect encourages others to follow suit. The We contribute to the literature on the SDGs, and visibility of large MNEs encourages others to emu- SDG 5 in particular, by showing how high-quality late their practices, creating a bandwagon effect evidence and EBP can assist in the attainment of (Van Zanten & van Tulder, 2018: 225). We there- the 2030 Agenda. Our paper also contributes to the fore recommend that, as part of mainstreaming literature on gender equality by exploring differ- gender equality in their organizations, MNE CEOs ences between ﬁve gender inequality indexes, sign on to the seven Women’s Empowerment building on Eden and Gupta (2017), and assessing Principles. their relative appropriateness as evidence in an EBP In sum, our recommendations, drawn from the approach to SDG 5. Our paper also addresses the SDG Materiality Matrix, would mainstream gender research agenda items outlined by Witte and Dil- equality throughout the MNE group and send a yard (2017), including how government policies on strong signal to stakeholders and other MNEs. the SDGs affect MNE strategies and predict which ﬁrms will engage and how they will engage with the SDGs. CONCLUSION A key innovation in our paper is the introduction Gender equality is 1 of 17 ‘‘wicked problems’’ in the of a new EBP framework for MNEs, the SDG 2030 Agenda. The issue fulﬁlls all the criteria: Materiality Matrix, based on four factors (Quality, systemic, complexly interrelated, with material Salience, Actionability, and Ethicality), which involvement by multiple actors at multiple levels MNEs can use to select and implement policies for across multiple countries (van Tulder, 2018). There their preferred SDG targets. We also contribute to is wide recognition that better evidence is needed the CSR literature by expanding it to encompass to foster women’s voice and agency, and to meet the SDGs, applying CSR insights into our SDG the UN challenge to leave no one behind (Thomas Materiality Matrix, and developing the concepts of et al., 2018; UN Women, 2018). Our paper explores ex ante and ex post materiality. how insights from EBP can be useful for tackling Going forward, we argue that IB scholars need to the WP of SDG 5 and the 2030 Agenda. better understand how, why, and where MNEs are Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff involved in the SDG process. Our SDG Materiality Piper (2019) argues that Nicaragua’s fast rise up Matrix could be used as the framework for case the GGGI country rankings was due to the GGGI studies of MNE interactions with other SDGs. ignoring national levels of economic development; Lastly, our paper could be expanded to discuss the ‘‘if the situation is bad for both genders, but role of evidence and EBP for the SDGs from the similarly bad, the Index will report (accurately) a perspective of other organizations, such as business narrow gender gap’’ (Piper, 2019: 1395). Constan- schools and professional associations. To what tine (2017) reached a similar conclusion. Piper extent are they involved in the 2030 Agenda and (2019) also tested whether Nicaraguan women what policy processes are they adopting to ensure reported greater life satisfaction when the gender that no one is left behind and everyone’s voice is gap narrowed; once GDP growth rates were heard? accounted for, no differences between Nicaragua and other countries remained. Measures of violence against women, such as forced marriages, gender-selective abortions, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS human trafﬁcking, and sexual violence in armed This paper was ﬁrst presented at a JIBP Workshop at conﬂicts, are missing. Both indexes are silent on the Academy of International Business meetings in discriminatory laws and stereotypes pervasive in Copenhagen in June 2019. We thank the JIBP Special many countries that deter gender equality. In Issue Editors, especially Rob van Tulder, and the addition, women’s rights to economic resources, anonymous reviewers, for their thoughtful, detailed, as well as access to ownership and control over land and helpful comments on the paper. We thank Reilly and other forms of property, ﬁnancial services, Smith for her assistance with the datasets. Any inheritance, and natural resources, are typically remaining errors are the authors. absent from the indexes. A look at the indicators in the SDSN’s gender index provides some evidence on the difﬁculties of NOTES capturing ‘‘no one left behind.’’ Of the 14 target indicators for SDG 5 (i.e., 5.1.1 to 5.c.1 in Table 1), For good literature reviews, see the August 2012 the actual measures used appear to be a combina- special issue of Journal of Agricultural and Environ- tion of GII and GGGI indicators. mental Ethics introduced by Whyte and Thompson Barnat, MacFeely and Peltola (2019a, b) con- (2012), and the December 2019 special issue of ducted a principal component analysis of the GII, Policy and Society introduced by Termeer et al. GGGI, and SIGI; the indexes clustered on four (2019). components: education and women’s social condi- In an interesting test of Newman and Head tions, women’s economic and labor market partic- (2017), Peters and Tarpey (2019) surveyed research- ipation, women’s political participation, and ers on six policy problems, asking respondents to health. assess each problem’s wickedness according to the Histories and analyses of EBP can be found in, ten propositions. The respondents viewed all six as for example, Brownson, Gurney and Land (1999), having some degree of wickedness, which Nutley et al. (2003), Davies (2004), Sutcliffe and depended on complexity and conﬂict. Court (2006), Head (2010), Jayaraman and Rocholl See, for example, Hudson, Ballif-Spanvill, Capri- (2017), Saltelli and Giampietro (2017), Haskins oli and Emmett (2012), Klugman, Hanmer, Twigg, (2018), and Hewlett Foundation (2018). Hasan, McCleary Sills and Santamaria Bonilla EU (2017a) provides a useful case study of (2014), Hudson (2015), McKinsey Global Institute efforts by the European Institute for Gender Equal- (2015), and Hudson et al. (2020). ity to launch, implement, and evaluate the gender To create the index, all data are converted to mainstreaming platform. indicator ratios that are truncated at 1; scores On EBP, see, for example, Davies, Nutley and between 0 and 1 for each target are calculated Smith (2000), Sutcliffe and Court (2005), Davies using weighted averages of the individual indica- (2012), Strehlenert, Richter-Sundberg, Nystrom and tors; and the ﬁnal score is calculated as an Hasson (2015), and European Commission (2017b). unweighted average of the four targets (World Newman and Head (2017) provide mini-case Economic Forum, WEF, 2020: 17: 45–48). studies of climate change, genetically modiﬁed foods, and hydraulic fracturing. In all three cases, Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff there was abundant scientiﬁc evidence on which since ‘‘conﬂicting advice received from multiple almost all scientists agreed. Despite the evidence, donors and external advisers only provides an public policy was driven by political dynamics and incentive for playing the system and producing embedded biases. The authors conclude that good inconsistent policy formulas’’ (Bartlett, 2013:464). evidence alone cannot address wicked problems; Using EBP at the regional level is explored in rather, the cure lies in ‘‘untangling the political Lofstedt and Schlag’s (2017) account of how Euro- dynamics and values-based discourse’’ (Newman & pean governments handled the heated debate over Head, 2017: 424). whether to allow the use of the chemical Bisphenol The well-known phrase ‘‘lies, damned lies, and A in Europe; the authors concluded that policy statistics’’ also points to a broader critique of decisions were ideological, not evidence- or risk- evidence: the crisis of reproducibility, integrity, based. and legitimacy that currently plagues academic The data collection and analysis are part of the research. Ethical pitfalls bedevil academia, espe- UN Women Count Project established in 2016 to cially in research, as evidenced by growing numbers ‘‘improve the production and use of gender data of shoddy research practices, article retractions, and and help countries monitor the SDGs from a gender predatory journals (Eden et al., 2018; Nielsen, Eden, perspective’’ (Seck & Maskey, 2019: 3). & Verbeke, 2020). The crisis in science creates a UN Women (2019a: 5) estimates that socio- crisis of trust; how can policymakers trust the demographic data are missing for up to 350 million research ﬁndings when scientists themselves are people. behaving badly? The SDG indicators are classiﬁed into three The problem of weak academic-policymaker tiers: tier 1 (highest quality = established method- linkages may be changing. A recent example is ology with widely available data), tier 2 (mid- Responsible Research in Business and Management, quality = established methodology but data not a global network of business and management easily available) and tier 3 (lowest quality = no faculty that encourages research on societal issues internationally accepted methodology). As of April with practical relevance for policymakers and busi- 2019, only 44% of the SDG indicators were tier 1 nesses (Responsible Research in Business and Man- and 15% were tier 3 (MacFeely & Nastav, 2019: agement, Community, 2017). Some academic 311). associations are also setting up policy journals, The Statistics Division of the UN Department of such as the Academy of International Business’s Economic and Social Affairs maintains a list of Journal of International Business Policy, speciﬁcally to proposed changes to the SDG indicators at https:// encourage scholars to engage in scholarly policy- unstats.un.org/sdgs/iaeg-sdgs/2020-comprev/ based research. UNSC-proposal/ (last accessed 15 May 2020). 15 23 For examples, see Davies et al. (2000), Nutley See, for example, Eden (2020), Kolk (2016), et al. (2003), Mulgan (2005), Shepherd (2007), Schlegelmilch and Szo ¨ cs (2020), Scho ¨ nherr et al. Janssen and Forbes (2014), and Commission on (2017), van Tulder (2018), and van Zanten and van Evidence-Based Policymaking (2017). Tulder (2018). 16 24 A useful example of how internationally The UNGC now has more than 14,000 member endorsed EBP can fail in developing countries is ﬁrms; its members committed originally to 10 Behague, Tawiah, Rosato, Some and Morrison’s principles related to human rights, labor, the (2009) study of the conﬂict between the neonatal environment, and anti-corruption. In 2015, the and maternal health care targets in the Millennium UNGC also signed onto the 2030 Agenda and Development Goals (UN, 2015a). Developing coun- developed its own set of 10 Action Platforms to try governments were asked to collect statistics and encourage networking between businesses, govern- adopt EBP for neonatal health care, but, hampered ments, and NGOs. (https://www.unglobalcompact. by lack of policy capacity and resources, ended up org/sdgs/action-platforms). diverting resources from maternal to neonatal For example, pages 206–207 of the GRI and health care. The authors concluded that interna- UNGC (2017) Report assess which SDG 5 targets are tional norms ignored local policy needs, weakening most closely and least closely tied to business, and the beneﬁts of EBP. then provide a detailed assessment of the best The assistance of four international organiza- available indicators for each target. Detailed com- tions (the European Commission, World Bank, mentaries are provided on each SDG 5 indicator OECD, and UNDP) proved to be a mixed blessing with suggestions for gender statistics that the MNE Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff could collect itself (see GRI, and UN Global Com- systematic approach to interactions between MNEs pact, UNGC, 2017: 59–68). and UN agencies can also create risks and conﬂicts The OECD has created a new set of FDI of interest. Qualities Indicators designed to measure the The principles were developed under the WE impact of FDI on sustainable development. OECD EMPOWER program, a program funded by the (2019, Ch.5) takes a ‘‘women at work’’ approach, European Union and implemented by UN Women arguing that there are four channels through which and the International Labor Organization (https:// FDI can affect SDG 5: employment, wages, top www.weps.org/join). management positions, and entrepreneurship (see For example, at the January 2020 Davos meet- also UNCTAD, 2014). The OECD’s new FDI quali- ings of the World Economic Forum, the UNGC ties index may prove useful for tracking SDG together with SAP and Accenture announced, ‘‘SDG performance for MNEs that adopt SDG 5 as their Ambition’’, challenging its members to raise their corporate social strategy. level of commitment to the 2030 Agenda (UN There is also some evidence that MNEs may Global Compact, UNGC, 2020). choose to make a symbolic commitment to the Every scholar stands on the shoulders of earlier SDGs, or, worse, use the process to impede govern- scholars. We owe a particular debt to Robert van ment regulation by lobbying (Seitz, 2019). The Tulder for his seminal work applying insights from ‘‘scope, intent and impact of business’ involvement the WP literature to the 2030 Agenda (van Tulder, in the SDGs is often ‘‘vague and hard to measure’’, 2018). according to Abshagen, Cavazzini, Graen and Oberland (2018: 7). The lack of a common and REFERENCES Abshagen, M.-L., Cavazzini, A., Graen, L., & Obenland, W. Bartlett, W. 2013. Obstacles to evidence-based policy-making in 2018. Highjacking the SDGs? The private sector and the the EU Enlargement Countries: The case of skills policies. Social sustainable development goals. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. Policy and Administration, 47(4): 451–467. https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/GPFEurope/ Behague, D., Tawiah, C., Rosato, M., Some, T., & Morrison, J. Hijacking_the_SDGs.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020. 2009. Evidence-based policy-making: The implications of Accenture. 2019. The decade to deliver: A call to business action. globally-applicable research for context-speciﬁc problem-solv- The United Nations Global Compact—Accenture Strategy CEO ing in developing countries. Social Science and Medicine, 69: Study on Sustainability 2019. United Nations Global Compact. 1539–1546. Alford, J., & Head, B. W. 2017. Wicked and less wicked Bellantuono, N., Pontrandolfo, P., & Scozzi, B. 2018. Guiding problems: A typology and a contingency framework. Policy materiality analysis for sustainability reporting: The case of the and Society, 36(3): 397–413. agri-food sector. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Allen, C., Metternicht, G., & Wiedmann, T. 2018. Initial progress Management, 18(4): 336–359. in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Best, J. 2012. Damned lies and statistics: Untangling numbers from A review of evidence from countries. Sustainability Science, 13: the media, politicians and activists. Los Angeles: University of 1453–1467. California Press. Alon, T., Doepke, M., Olmstead-Rumsey, J., & Tertilt, M. 2020. Branisa, B., Klasen, S., Ziegler, M., Drechsler, D., & Jutting, J. The impact of COVID-19 on gender equality. NBER Working 2014. The institutional basis of gender inequality: The social Paper No. 26947, April. https://www.nber.org/papers/ institutions and gender index (SIGI). Feminist Economics, 20(2): w26947. Accessed 2 July 2020. 29–64. Andrus, J. K., Jauregui, B., De Oliveira, L. H., & Ruiz Matus, C. Breuer, A., Janetschek, H., & Malerba, D. 2019. Translating 2011. Challenges to building capacity for evidence-based new sustainable development goal (SDG) interdependencies into vaccine policy in developing countries. Health Affairs, 30(6): policy advice. Sustainability, 11(April): 1–20. 1104–1112. Brownson, R. C, Gurney, J. G., & Land, G. H. 1999. Evidence- Bannink, D., & Trommel, W. 2019. Intelligent modes of based decision making in public health. Journal of Public Health imperfect governance. Policy and Society, 38(2): 198–217. Management Practice, 5(5): 86–97. Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019a. Comparing global Bull, B., & McNeill, D. 2019. From market multilateralism to gender inequality indices: How well do they measure the governance by goal setting: SDGs and the changing order of economic dimension? Journal of Sustainability Research,1: partnerships in a new global order. Business and Politics, 21(4): e190016. https://doi.org/10.20900/jsr20190016. Accessed 2 464–486. July 2020. Bull, B., & Miklian, J. 2019. Towards global business engage- Barnat, N., MacFeely, S., & Peltola, A. 2019b. Comparing Global ment with development goals? Multilateral institutions and Gender Inequality Indices: What can they tell us about the SDGs in a changing global capitalism. Business and Politics, development? In Presented at the UN Economic Commission 21(4): 445–463. for Europe Conference of European Statisticians Work Session on Business for 2030. 2020. UN metrics and indicators for the SDGs. Gender Statistics, Neuchatel, Switzerland, 15–17 May. Work- Forging a path for business in the UN 2030 Development ing Paper No. 16. Agenda. http://www.businessfor2030.org/metrics-indicators. Barro, R. J. & Lee, J.-W. 2016.Education matters. Global schooling Accessed 2 July 2020. gains from the 19th to the 21st century, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff Buvinic, M., & Levine, R. 2015. What is wrong with data on Eden, L., Lund Dean, K., & Vaaler, P. 2018. The ethical professor: women and girls? Data2x: Partnering for a gender data A practical guide to research, teaching, and professional life. New revolution. November. 8 pp. York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis. Buvinic, M., Furst-Nichols, R., & Koolwal, G. 2014. Mapping Equal Measures 2030 (EM 2030). 2019. Harnessing the power of gender data gaps, DATA2x: Partnering for a gender data data for gender equality: Introducing the 2019 EM2030 gender revolution, March. 8 pp. https://data2x.org/resourcecenter/ index. Surrey: Equal Measures 2030. mapping-gender-data-gaps/. Accessed 2 July 2020. European Commission. 2017a. 2017 Report on Equality between Calabrese, A., Costa, R., Ghiron, N. L., & Menichini, T. 2017. Women and Men in the EU. Luxembourg: Publications Ofﬁce of Materiality analysis in sustainability reporting: A method for the European Union. making it work in practice. European Journal of Sustainable European Commission. 2017b. Quality of public administration: A Development, 6(3): 439–447. toolbox for practitioners. Luxembourg: Publications Ofﬁce of Caplan, N. 1979. The two-communities theory and knowledge the European Union. utilization. American Behavioral Scientist, 22(3): 459–470. Fukuda-Parr, S. 2014. Global goals as a policy tool: Intended and Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking. 2017. The unintended consequences. Journal of Human Development and promise of evidence-based policymaking. Report of the Commis- Capabilities, 15(2–3): 118–131. sion on Evidence-Based Policymaking, September 7. Washing- Fukuda-Parr, S., & McNeill, D. 2018. Knowledge and power in ton, DC: U.S. Government. setting and measuring SDGs. Global Policy Journal, 10 (Sup- Constantine, G. 2017. Does Nicaragua match up to its global plement 1): 5–15. gender gap report ranking on women’s rights? Eye On Latin Garten, M. 2020. Coronavirus update: COVID-19 likely to cost America, November 6. https://eyeonlatinamerica.com/2014/ economy $1 trillion during 2020, says UN Trade Agency. UN 11/06/nicaragua-global-gender-gap-report-2014/. Accessed 2 News, March 9. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/03/ July 2020. 1059011. Accessed 2 July 2020. Court, J., & Young, J. 2006. Bridging research and policy in Government of Malawi. 2016. Guidelines for evidence use in international development: An analytical and practical frame- decision-making in the health sector in Malawi. Ministry of work. Development in Practice, 16(1): 85–90. Health. Crowley, K., & Head, B. 2017. The enduring challenge of GRI, and UN Global Compact. 2017. Business reporting on the ‘‘wicked problems’’: Revisiting Rittel and Webber. Policy SDGs: An analysis of the goals and targets. https://www. Science, 50: 537–547. globalreporting.org/information/SDGs/Pages/Reporting-on- Data for African Development Working Group. 2014. Delivering the-SDGs.aspx. Accessed 2 July 2020. on the data revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa. Center for Global GRI, and UN Global Compact (UNGC). 2018. Business reporting Development and African Population and Health Research on the SDGs: Integrating the SDGs into corporate reporting, a Center. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/delivering-data- practical guide. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/ revolution-sub-saharan-africa-0. Accessed 2 July 2020. 5628. Accessed 2 July 2020. DATA2x. 2017. Big data and the well-being of women and girls: Hantrais, L., Lenihan, A. T., & MacGregor, S. 2015. Evidence- Applications on the social science frontier, April. https://data2x. based policy: Exploring international and interdisciplinary org/resource-center/big-data-and-the-wellbeing-of-women- insights. Contemporary Social Science: Journal of the Academy and-girls/. Accessed 2 July 2020. of Social Science 10(2): 101–113. DATA2x. 2019. Big data, big impact? Towards gender-sensitive Haskins, R. 2018. Evidence-based policy: The movement, the data systems, November. https://data2x.org/resource-center/ goals, the issues, the promise. Annals, AAPSS, 678: 8–37. big-data-report/. Accessed 2 July 2020. Head, B. W. 2008. Three lenses of evidence-based policy. The Davies, P. T. 2004. Is evidence-based government possible? Jerry Australian Journal of Public Administration, 67(1): 1–11. Lee Lecture. https://www.eldis.org/document/A18705. Head, B. W. 2010. Reconsidering evidence-based policy: Key issues and challenges. Policy and Society, 29(2): 77–94. Accessed 2 July 2020. Davies, P. T. 2012. The state of evidence-based policy evaluation Head, B. W. 2019. Forty years of wicked problems literature: and its role in policy formation. National Institute Economic Forging closer links to policy studies. Policy and Society, 38(2): Review, 219(January): R41–R52. 180–197. Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M., & Smith, P. C. 2000. What works: Head, B. W., & Alford, J. 2015. Wicked problems: Implications Evidence-based policy and practice in public services. Bristol: The for public policy and management. Administration and Society, Policy Press. 47(6): 711–739. Daviter, F. 2017. Coping, taming or solving: Alternative Hewlett Foundation. 2018. Evidence-informed policymaking strat- approaches to the governance of wicked problems. Policy egy. Global Development and Population Program, March. Studies, 38(6): 571–588. Howes, S., Betteridge, A., Sause, L., & Ugyel, L. 2017. Evidence- Daviter, F. 2019. Policy analysis in the face of complexity: What based policy making in the Tropics: Are developing countries kind of knowledge to tackle wicked problems? Public Policy different? Development Policy Centre Discussion Paper No. 59, and Administration, 34(1): 62–82. July 26. ANU Research Paper Series. Canberra, Australia: De Marchi, G., Lucertini, G., & Tsoukia ` s, A. 2016. From Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National Univer- evidence-based policy making to policy analytics. Annals of sity. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3009196. Accessed 2 July Operation Research, 236: 15–38. 2020. Donoher, W. 2017. The multinational and the legitimation of Hudson, V. 2015. Leveling the ﬁeld: A global inventory of sustainable development. Transnational Corporations, 24(3): gender equality for women. World Politics Review, September 49–60. 1. https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/16572/ Eden, L. 2020. The social responsibility of multinationals: From leveling-the-ﬁeld-a-global-inventory-of-gender-equality-for- an after-thought to center stage. In B. Schlegelmilch and I. women. Accessed 2 July 2020. Szocs (Eds.) Rethinking business responsibility in a global Hudson, V., Ballif-Spanvill, B., Caprioli, M., & Emmett, C. 2012. context—Challenges to corporate social responsibility, sustain- Sex and world peace. New York: Columbia University Press. ability and ethics. Springer Series: CSR, sustainability, ethics Hudson, V., Bowen, D. L., & Nielsen, L. 2020. The First Political and governance. Cham: Springer. Order: How sex shapes governance and national security Eden, L., & Gupta, S. F. 2017. Culture and context matter: worldwide. New York: Columbia University Press. Gender in international business and management. Cross Ike, M. Donovan, J. D., Topple, C., & Masli, E. K. 2019. The Cultural and Strategic Management, 24: 194–210. process of selecting and prioritizing corporate sustainability Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff issues: Insights for achieving the sustainable development Mulgan, G. 2005. Government, knowledge and the business of goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 236: 1–13. policy making: The potential and limits of evidence-based Janssen, T., & Forbes, S. 2014. The use of ofﬁcial statistics in policy. Evidence and Policy, 1(2): 215–226. evidence-based policymaking in New Zealand. In K. Makar, B. Nature. 2020. Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on de Sousa & R. Gould (Eds.) Sustainability in statistics education. track. Nature, 577(January 2): 7–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ Proceedings of the ninth international conference on teaching d41586-019-03907-4. Accessed 2 July 2020. statistics (ICOTS9), Flagstaff, Arizona, USA, July 2014. Voor- Newman, J., & Head, B. W. 2017. Wicked tendencies in policy burg: International Statistical Institute. iase-web.org. problems: Rethinking the distinction between social and Jayaraman, R., & Rocholl, J. 2017. Research-based policy advice technical problems. Policy and Society, 36(3): 414–429. to the G20. G20 Insights. G20 Germany 2017 Think 20 Newman, J., Cherney, A., & Head, B. W. 2016. Do policy makers Dialogue, May 29. https://www.g20-insights.org/policy_ use academic research? Reexamining the ‘‘Two Communities’’ briefs/research-based-policy-advice-g20/. Accessed 2 July theory of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 2020. 76(1): 24–32. Klugman, J., Hanmer, L., Twigg, S., Hasan, T., McCleary Sills, J., Newman, J., Cherney, A., & Head, B. W. 2017. Policy capacity & Santamaria Bonilla, A. J. 2014. Voice and agency: Empow- and evidence-based policy in the public service. Public ering women and girls for shared prosperity. Washington, DC: Management Review, 19(2): 157–174. World Bank. Ney, S., & Verweij, M. 2015. Messy institutions for messy Kolk, A. 2016. The social responsibility of international business: problems: How to generate clumsy solutions? Environment and From ethics and the environment to CSR and sustainable Planning C, 33: 1679–1696. development. Journal of World Business, 51: 23–34. Nielsen, B. B., Eden, L., & Verbeke, A. 2020. Research methods Kolk, A., Kourula, A., & Pisani, N. 2017. Multinational enter- in international business: Challenges and advances. In L. Eden, prises and the Sustainable Development Goals: What do we B. B. Nielsen & A. Verbeke (Eds.) Research methods in know and how to proceed? Transnational Corporations, 24(3): international business. JIBS Special Collections: 3–41. London: 9–32. Palgrave Macmillan. Langer, L., Tripney, J., & Gough, D. 2016. The science of using Nutley, S., Davies, H., & Walter, I. (2003). Evidence-based policy science: Researching the use of research evidence in decision- and practice: Cross-sector lessons from the United Kingdom. making. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 20: 29–48. UCL Institute of Education, University College London. O’Brien, K., Fitzsimmons, T. W., Crane, M., & Head, B. 2017. Lederer, E. M. 2020. UN chief says COVID-19 is worst crisis since Workplace gender inequality as a wicked problem: Implica- World War II. Associated Press. https://abcnews.go.com/US/ tions for research and practice. In Academy of Management wireStory/chief-covid-19-worst-crisis-world-war-ii-69905340. annual meeting proceedings, Briarcliff Manor, NY. Accessed 2 July 2020. OECD. 2017. The pursuit of gender equality: An uphill battle. Paris: Lofstedt, R., & Schlag, A. K. 2017. Looking back and going OECD. forward: What should the new European Commission do in OECD. 2018a. Development Co-operation Report 2018: Joining order to promote evidence-based policy-making? Journal of forces to leave no one behind. Paris: OECD. Risk Research, 20(11): 1359–1378. OECD. 2018b. Gender equality: Gender, institutions and devel- Lubua, E. W., & Maharaj, M. S. 2012. ICT policy and e- opment database 2009 (GID-DB). OECD Social and Welfare transparency in Tanzania. In P. Cunningham & M. Cunning- Statistics (database). https://doi.org/10.1787/f3947736-en. ham (Eds.) IST-Africa 2012 conference proceedings. IICM Accessed 2 July 2020. International Information Management Corporation. OECD. 2019. SIGI 2019 Global Report: Transforming challenges Lugo-Gil, J., Jean-Baptiste, D., & Livia Frasso Jaramillo, L. 2019. into opportunities. Paris: OECD. Use of evidence to drive decision-making in government. Oliver, K., & Cairney, P. 2019. The dos and don’ts of inﬂuencing Mathematica Policy Research, February 20, 80pp. https://www. policy: A systematic review of advice to academics. Palgrave mathematica.org/-/media/publications/pdfs/education/2019/ Communications, 5:21. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019- useofevidenceindecisionmaking.pdf. 0232-y. Accessed 2 July 2020. MacFeely, S. 2019a. The big (data) bang: Opportunities and Parkhurst, J. 2017. The politics of evidence: From evidence-based challenges for compiling SDG indicators. Global Policy, 10(1): policy to the good governance of evidence. Routledge studies in 121–133. governance and public policy. Abingdon: Routledge. MacFeely, S. 2019b. The political economy of measuring the Peace Corps. 2020. Global issues: Gender equality and women’s sustainable development goals. UNCTAD Research Paper No. empowerment. https://www.peacecorps.gov/educators/ 32. UNCTAD/SER.RP/2019/4. Geneva: United Nations. resources/global-issues-gender-equality-and-womens- MacFeely, S., & Nastav, B. 2019. ‘‘You say you want a [data] empowerment/. Accessed 2 July 2020. revolution’’: A proposal to use unofﬁcial statistics for the SDG Permanyer, I. 2013a. A critical assessment of the UNDP’s gender Global Indicator Framework. Statistical Journal of the IAOS, 35: inequality index. Feminist Economics, 19(2): 1–32. 309–327. Permanyer, I. 2013b. Are UNDP indices appropriate to capture McCall, R., & Burge, J. 2016. Untangling wicked problems. gender inequalities in Europe? Social Indicators Research, 110: Artiﬁcial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Man- 927–950. ufacturing, 30: 200–210. Peters, B. G., & Tarpey, M. 2019. Are wicked problems really so McKinsey Global Institute. 2015. The power of parity: How wicked? Perceptions of policy problems. Policy and Society, advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global 38(2): 218–236. growth, September. McKinsey Global Institute. https://www. Piper, A. 2019. An investigation into the reported closing of the mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/how- Nicaraguan gender gap. Social Indicators Research, 144: 1391– advancing-womens-equality-can-add-12-trillion-to-global- 1413. growth. Accessed 2 July 2020. PwC. 2016. Make it your business: Engaging with the sustainable Miller, S. R., Eden, L., & Li, D. 2020. CSR reputation and ﬁrm development goals. www.pwc.com/sdg. Accessed 2 July 2020. performance: A dynamic approach. Journal of Business Ethics, Rademacher, W. J. 2019. Governing-by-the-numbers/statistical 16(3): 619–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4057- governance: Reﬂections on the future of ofﬁcial statistics in a 1. Accessed 2 July 2020. digital and globalised society. Statistical Journal of the IAOS, Monaghan, M., Pawson, R., & Wicker, K. 2012. The precau- 35(4): 519–537. tionary principle and evidence-based policy. Evidence and Responsible Research in Business and Management, Community Policy, 8(2): 171–191. for (RRBM). 2017. A vision of responsible research in business Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff and management: Striving for useful and credible knowledge. Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. 2006. A toolkit for progressive policymak- Position Paper, November 22. https://rrbm.network/position- ers in developing countries. Research and policy in development paper/. Accessed 2 July 2020. programme. London: Overseas Development Institute (ODI). Richards, G. W. 2017. How research-policy partnerships can Szo ¨ cs, I., & Schlegelmilch, B. 2020. Embedding CSR in corpo- beneﬁt government: A win–win for evidence-based policy- rate strategies. In B. Schlegelmilch & I. Szocs (Eds.) Rethinking making. Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de Politiques, June: business responsibility in a global context: Challenges to corpo- 165–170. rate social responsibility, sustainability and ethics. Cham: Rittel, H. 1972. On the planning crisis: Systems analysis of the Springer. ‘First and Second Generations’. BedriktsØkonomen NR.8: 390. Termeer, C. J. A. M., & Dewulf, A. 2019. A small wins framework Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. 1973. Dilemmas in a general to overcome the evaluation paradox of governing wicked theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4: 155–169. problems. Policy and Society, 38(2): 298–314. Sachs, J., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Lafortune, G., & Fuller, G. Termeer, C. J. A. M., Dewulf, A., & Biesbroek, R. 2019. A critical 2019. Sustainable Development Report 2019. New York: assessment of the wicked problem concept: Relevance and Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions usefulness for policy science and practice. Policy and Society, Network (SDSN). 38(2): 167–179. Saltelli, A., & Giampietro, M. 2017. What is wrong with Terpstra-Tong, J. L. Y. 2017. MNE subsidiaries’ adoption of evidence based policy, and how can it be improved? Futures, gender equality and women empowerment goal: A concep- 91: 62–71. tual framework. Transnational Corporations, 24(3): 89–102. Schlegelmilch, B., & Szo ¨ cs. I. (Eds.) 2020. Rethinking business Thomas, M., Cordova Novion, C., de Haan, A., de Leo ´ n, G., responsibility in a global context: Challenges to corporate social Forest, M., & Iyer, S. S. 2018. Gender Mainstreaming: A responsibility, sustainability and ethics. Uitgever: Springer. strategic approach. Global Solutions Journal (T20 Policy Brief), Schmidt-Traub, G., Kroll, C., Teksoz, K., Durand-Delacre, D., & 1(2): 155–173. Sachs, J. D. 2017. National baselines for the Sustainable UN Economic Commission for Europe. 2019. Towards a Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dash- conceptual framework for measuring gender-in-trade in ofﬁ- boards. Nature Geosciences, 10: 547–555. https://doi.org/10. cial statistics. In Note by the United Nations Conference on Trade 1038/ngeo2985. Accessed 2 July 2020. and Development. Conference of European Statisticians, Work Scho ¨ nherr, N., Findler, F., & Martinuzzi, A. 2017. Exploring the Session on Gender Statistics. Working Paper No. 25. April 8. interface of CSR and the sustainable development goals. UN Global Compact, UNGC. 2020. SDG ambition: Scaling Transnational Corporations, 24(3): 33–42. business impact for the decade of action, January 23. https:// Scott, C. 2005. Measuring up to the measurement problem: The www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/sdg-ambition. Acces- role of statistics in evidence-based policymaking. In Proceed- sed 2 July 2020. ings of the 2005 CBMS Network meeting: 35–92. UN Statistics Division, UNSD. 2020. E-handbook on the sustain- Seck, P., & Maskey, S. 2019. Use data to take the guesswork out able development goals. New York: United Nations. https:// of policymaking. UN Women, September 24. https://data. unstats.un.org/wiki/display/SDGeHandbook/Home. Accessed unwomen.org/features/use-data-take-guesswork-out- 2 July 2020. policymaking. Accessed 2 July 2020. UN Women. 1995. Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action/ Seitz, K. 2019. A Fatal Attraction? Business engagement with the Beijing +5 Political Declaration and Outcome. New York: United 2030 Agenda, February. Berlin: Global Policy Forum. https:// Nations. www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/A_Fatal_Attraction_ UN Women. 2018. Turning promises into action: Gender equality online.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020. in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York: Selin, H. 2015. The risk of UN’s Sustainable Development Goals: United Nations. Too many goals, too little focus. The Conversation, September UN Women. 2019a. Progress on the Sustainable Development 25. http://theconversation.com/the-risk-of-uns-sustainable- Goals 2019. New York: United Nations. development-goals-too-many-goals-too-little-focus-48083. UN Women. 2019b. WE EMPOWER: Responsible business conduct Accessed 2 July 2020. in G7 countries. New York: United Nations. Serdijn, M., Kolk, A., & Fransen, L. (2020). Uncovering missing UN Women and PARIS21. 2019. Assessing data and capacity links in global value chain research—And implications for gaps in gender statistics. https://paris21.org/node/3286. corporate social responsibility and international business. Accessed 2 July 2020. Critical Perspectives on International Business. https://doi.org/ UN Women. 2020. Gender equality: Women’s rights in review 10.1108/cpoib-01-2020-0002. Accessed 2 July 2020. 25 years after Beijing. New York: United Nations. Shepherd, J. 2007. The production and management of UNCTAD. 2014. Investment by TNCs and gender: Preliminary evidence for public service reform. Evidence and Policy, 3(2): assessment and way forward. Investment for Development Policy 231–251. Research Series. Geneva: UNCTAD. Sotsky, J. G., Shibuya, S., Kolovich, L., & Kebhaj, S. 2016. Trends UNCTAD. 2016. Development and globalization: Facts and in gender equality and women’s advancement. Working Paper ﬁgures. Geneva: UNCTAD. No. WP/16/21, February. Washington, DC: International UNCTAD. 2018. Better data and statistics for gender-responsive Monetary Fund. trade policy. UNCTAD Policy Brief, No. 70, October. Geneva: Strassheim, H., & Kettunen, P. 2014. When does evidence- UNCTAD. based policy turn into policy-based evidence? Conﬁgurations, UNCTAD. 2020a. COVID-19 requires gender-equal responses to contexts and mechanisms. Evidence and Policy, 10(2): 259– save economies, April 1. https://unctad.org/en/pages/ 277. newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2319. Accessed 2 July Strehlenert, H., Richter-Sundberg, L., Nystrom, M. E., & Hasson, 2020. H. 2015. Evidence-informed policy formulation and imple- UNCTAD. 2020b. UN calls for $2.5 trillion coronavirus crisis mentation: A comparative case study of two national policies package for developing countries, March 30. https://unctad. for improving health and social care in Sweden. Implementa- org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspx?OriginalVersionID=2315. tion Science. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0359-1. Accessed 2 July 2020. Accessed 2 July 2020. UNDP. 2018. Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. 2005. Evidence-Based Policymaking: What Statistical update, technical note. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/ is it? How does it work? What relevance for developing countries? default/ﬁles/hdr2018_technical_notes.pdf. Accessed 2 July London: Overseas Development Institute. 2020. Journal of International Business Policy Policymaking and SDG 5 gender equality Lorraine Eden and M. Fernanda Wagstaff UNDP. 2019. Human Development Report 2019: Beyond income, World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. beyond averages, beyond today: Inequalities in human develop- 2017. CEO guide to the SDGs, March 27. https://www.wbcsd. ment in the 21st century. Geneva: United Nations. org/Overview/Resources/General/CEO-Guide-to-the-SDGs. United Nations. 2005. Enhanced cooperation between the United Accessed 2 July 2020. Nations and all relevant partners, in particular the private sector. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WBCSD. Report of the Secretary-General. New York: United Nations. 2018. Business and the SDGs, July 9. https://www.wbcsd.org/ United Nations. 2013. Economic and Social Council. Substantive qvl3. Accessed 2 July 2020. session of 2013. New York: United Nations. World Economic Forum, WEF. 2018. The Global Gender Gap United Nations. 2015a. The Millennium Development Goals Report, 2018. Insight Report. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Report 2015. New York: United Nations. https://www.un. World Economic Forum, WEF. 2020. The Global Gender Gap org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG% Report, 2020. Insight Report. Geneva: World Economic Forum. 202015%20rev%20(July%201).pdf. Accessed 2 July 2020. United Nations. 2015b. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. A/RES/70/1. ABOUT THE AUTHORS UN General Assembly, Seventieth Session. Agenda items 15 and 116. New York: United Nations. Lorraine Eden is Professor Emerita of Management United Nations. 2016. Integrating a gender perspective into and Research Professor of Law (joint appointment) statistics. Studies in Methods, Series F No. 111. New York: at Texas A&M University. Her current research Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division, United Nations. interests include transfer pricing and MNE strate- United Nations. 2019 Progress on the sustainable development gies in the digital economy. She was 2008–2010 goals: The gender snapshot 2019. New York: Department of Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of International Busi- Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations. United Nations. 2020. World economic situation and prospects as ness Studies and 2017–2018 President of the Acad- of mid-2020. New York: United Nations. emy of International Business. She is incoming UN-SQAF. 2018. UN Statistics quality assurance framework: Dean of the AIB Fellows for 2020–2023. Including a generic statistical quality assurance framework for a UN Agency. New York: United Nations. Van Tulder, R. 2018. Business and the sustainable development M. Fernanda Wagstaff is an Associate Professor in goals: A framework for effective corporate involvement. Rotter- the Department of Marketing and Management at dam: Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. Van Zanten, J. A., & van Tulder, R. 2018. Multinational the University of Texas at El Paso where she holds enterprises and the sustainable development goals: An insti- the Robert E. and Jacqeline Skov Professorship in tutional approach to corporate engagement. Journal of Inter- Business Ethics. She received her PhD from Texas national Business Policy, 1: 208–233. WBCSD. 2018. Reporting matters. Six years on: The state of play. A&M University. Her current research interests WBCSD 2019 Report. Geneva: WBCSD. include gender and diversity issues at work and Whyte, K. P., & Thompson, P. B. 2012. Ideas for how to take international human resource management. She is wicked problems seriously. Journal of Agricultural and Environ- mental Ethics, 25(August): 441–445. the Associate Editor of Management Research: The Witte, C., & Dilyard, J. 2017. Guest editors’ introduction to the Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management. special issue: The contribution of multinational enterprises to the Sustainable Development Goals. Transnational Corpora- tions, 24(3): 1–8. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Accepted by Rob van Tulder, Area Editor, 21 May 2020. This article has been with the authors for three revisions. Journal of International Business Policy

Journal

Journal of International Business Policy – Pubmed Central

Published: Jul 17, 2020

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 Gender Equality

Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 Gender Equality

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 Gender Equality

Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 Gender Equality

References (251)

Abstract

Journal

Recommended Articles

There are no references for this article.