Measuring Progress Beyond Growth: A Gender-Sensitive Study of Women Educators in Goa
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66635/6h854g85Keywords:
Gender-Sensitive Well-Being, Women in Higher Education, Human Capital Sustainability, Institutional Support and Work-Life Balance, Beyond GDP Development MetricsAbstract
This paper explores the shortcomings of using GDP as an exclusive measure of development by understanding women teachers' life satisfaction in a gender-sensitive manner in Goa. The research builds on the non-GDP approach to well-being as advocated by Parikh and Nazrana and examines the role of non-monetary factors, such as autonomy, recognition, institutional support and socio-cultural norms, in shaping subjective well-being. Through a qualitative case-study approach, semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis were applied to gather insights from women in aided and government colleges. The research shows that although higher education employment offers women financial security and an identity, they also face a "double burden" of institutional and domestic responsibilities, which affects their overall well-being. Most interviewees do not believe that money makes women happy, but consider supportive institutional settings, work-life balance and career advancement opportunities as important factors. The research identifies that institutional policies, promotion practices and socio-cultural expectations are crucial determinants of women's well-being and the workforce attrition in academia. By recognising women educators as a vital component of human capital in developing economies, the paper calls for incorporating gender-sensitive well-being measures into higher education policies and strategies. It concludes that a multidimensional understanding of progress is essential for fostering inclusive, sustainable institutional development beyond traditional economic measures.
References
1.Acker, J. (2012). Gendered organizations and intersectionality: Problems and possibilities. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 31(3), 214-224.
2.Blackmore, J. (2016). Educational leadership and Nancy Fraser. Routledge.
3.Bochare, R. (2025). Gender Parity in Higher Education: A Decade-Long Analysis of Female and Male Enrolment Trends in India (2011–2022). Gender Issues, 42(3), 24.
4.Conceição, P. (2020). Human development report 2020-the next frontier: Human development and the anthropocene. United Nations Development Programme: Human Development Report.
5.Dashper, K. (2019). Challenging the gendered rhetoric of success? The limitations of women‐only mentoring for tackling gender inequality in the workplace. Gender, Work & Organization, 26(4), 541-557.
6.Elomäki, A., & Ylöstalo, H. (2021). From promoting gender equality to managing gender equality policy. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 23(5), 741-762.
7.Heijstra, T. M., Steinthorsdóttir, F. S., & Einarsdóttir, T. (2017). Academic career making and the double-edged role of academic housework. Gender and Education, 29(6), 764-780.
8.Herschberg, C., Benschop, Y., & Van den Brink, M. (2018). Precarious postdocs: A comparative study on recruitment and selection of early-career researchers. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 34(4), 303-310.
9.Jaramillo, A. M., Macedo, M., Oliveira, M., Karimi, F., & Menezes, R. (2025). Systematic comparison of gender inequality in scientific rankings across disciplines. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.13061.
10.Khalil, E. L. (2022). Solving the income-happiness paradox. International Review of Economics, 69(3), 433-463.
11.Khalil, E. L. (2024). Is happiness independent of income? Set point theory à la Kahneman. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 54(4), 607-631.
12.Khanna, G., & Mukherjee, M. (2024). Intersectionality and women academics in Indian higher education. Journal of Underrepresented & Minority Progress, 8(SI (1)).
13.Kudrna, L., & Kushlev, K. (2022). Money does not always buy happiness, but are richer people less happy in their daily lives? It depends on how you analyze income. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 883137.
14.Levecque, K., Anseel, F., De Beuckelaer, A., Van der Heyden, J., & Gisle, L. (2017). Work organization and mental health problems in PhD students. Research policy, 46(4), 868-879.
15.Mazmanian, M., Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. (2013). The autonomy paradox: The implications of mobile email devices for knowledge professionals. Organization science, 24(5), 1337-1357.
16.Morley, L. (2013). The rules of the game: Women and the leaderist turn in higher education. Gender and education, 25(1), 116-131.
17.Muralidhar, S., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2024). Women’s representation in Indian academia and conferences. Communications biology, 7(1), 389.
18.Nielsen, M. W., Bloch, C. W., & Schiebinger, L. (2018). Making gender diversity work for scientific discovery and innovation. Nature human behaviour, 2(10), 726-734.
19.Parikh, A., & Nazrana, A. (2025). Alternative Measures to GDP: Happiness and Happy Planet Index. Learnings from Field, (2), 1-13.
20.Thien, L. M., Lim, H. L., Ahmad Shabudin, A. F., Che Aman, R., Ismail, A., Zuharah, W. F., & Muftahu, M. (2025). Women leadership in higher education: exploring enablers and challenges from middle-level academics’ perspective. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 95.
21.Vieira do Nascimento, D., Roser-Chinchilla, J., & Mutize, T. (2021). Women in higher education: has the female advantage put an end to gender inequalities?.
22.Winchester, H. P., & Browning, L. (2015). Gender equality in academia: A critical reflection. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 37(3), 269-281.
23.Work, I. C. (2018). Care Jobs for the Future of Decent Work. Geneva: International Labour Organization.
