Women Labor Force Participation and Its Impact on Economic Growth: A Study of Latin America and the Caribbean Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem being studied was that women were underrepresented in the labor force throughout Latin America and the Caribbean regions. In addition, although Latin America and the Caribbean regions experienced sound economic growth over the past decade, poverty levels dropped from 30% in 2021 to 28.5% in 2022. Development within low/low-middle income countries such as those within the Latin America and the Caribbean’s region, is more effected because of the reduction of gender inequality. This quantitative study explored how empowering women contributed to addressing and enhancing economic challenges in Latin America and the Caribbean. Additionally, it aimed to identify the relationship between women's empowerment and economic growth, while examining the influence of relevant variables on the economic development of these countries. This study was motivated by identifying a gap in the literature that made this research viable. Study found that there is statically a significant impact of women’ empowerment on economic growth, where an increase of 10 points in the women empowerment index, increases the growth of real GDP per capita by 2 percentage point per year. The data collected covers 29 countries and regions and covered metrics on women empowerment from 1982 – 2019, which spanned approximately 38 years. The study results concluded that women empowerment statistically impact GDP growth in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".