International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 12, Issue 3 (March 2025), Pages: 171-183

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Women’s labor force participation in Malaysia: Does higher educational attainment make a difference?

 Author(s): 

 Yasin Elhadary *

 Affiliation(s):

 Department of Geography, Faculty of Arts, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa, Saudi Arabia

 Full text

  Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6215-6006

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2025.03.017

 Abstract

Despite various efforts, women's participation in the labor force remains significantly lower than men's, with over 80% of men globally engaged in the labor force compared to around 50% of women. Numerous initiatives at national, regional, and global levels aim to achieve gender parity across various aspects of life, including education and employment, which is a core objective of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) launched in 2015 and targeted for completion by 2030. While women have increasingly dominated tertiary education in several countries, including Malaysia, this progress has not translated into equivalent improvements in labor force participation. This paper investigates the mismatch between women's educational attainment and their participation in the labor force, seeking to answer the fundamental question: Does higher education for women make a difference? Data from sources such as the World Bank, the World Economic Forum, and the Department of Statistics Malaysia were analyzed, alongside theories like human capital, the U-shape hypothesis, and signaling theory to conceptualize the education-labor force relationship. Findings indicate that the gross enrollment rate of women in Malaysia increased from 28% in 2000 to 46% in 2022, compared to 26% and 35% for men in the same years. Furthermore, labor force participation rates for those with tertiary education rose from 71.7% in 2013 to 82.6% in 2022 for men, and from 61.4% to 66.2% for women during the same period. These results demonstrate that although educational attainment has narrowed the gender gap in labor force participation, significant disparities persist. The findings emphasize the need for policymakers to address socio-economic, cultural, and demographic barriers that hinder educated women from fully participating in the labor force, especially in Malaysia and similar Muslim-majority countries.

 © 2025 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Gender parity, Labor force participation, Educational attainment, Tertiary education, Socio-economic barriers

 Article history

 Received 13 July 2024, Received in revised form 27 February 2025, Accepted 15 March 2025

 Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the Deanship of Scientific Research, Vice Presidency for Graduate Studies and Scientific Research, King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia [Grant No. KFU241565].

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Elhadary Y (2025). Women’s labor force participation in Malaysia: Does higher educational attainment make a difference? International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 12(3): 171-183

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 

----------------------------------------------   

 References (56)

  1. Aaronson D, Dehejia R, Jordan A, Pop-Eleches C, Samii C, and Schulze K (2021). The effect of fertility on mothers’ labor supply over the last two centuries. The Economic Journal, 131(633): 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/ueaa100   [Google Scholar]
  2. Akhtar R, Masud MM, and Rana MS (2020). Labor force participation and nature of employment among women in Selangor, Malaysia. Environment and Urbanization ASIA, 11(1): 123-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0975425320906285   [Google Scholar]
  3. Alfarran AKS (2023). Changing workplace patterns in Saudi Arabia: A gender lens. Journal of Gender Studies, 32(4): 317-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2021.2011169   [Google Scholar]
  4. Alias AH, Zamsuri ZH, and Mohd Suradi NR (2021). The profile of female labor force participation in Malaysia based on recursive partitioning analyses. Malaysian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences, 17(3): 226-241. https://doi.org/10.11113/mjfas.v17n3.2041   [Google Scholar]
  5. Alon T, Doepke M, Olmstead-Rumsey J, and Tertilt M (2020). The impact of the coronavirus pandemic on gender equality. COVID Economics Vetted and Real-Time Papers, 4: 62-85.   [Google Scholar]
  6. Al-Youbi AO, Al-Hayani A, Rizwan A, and Choudhry H (2020). Implications of COVID-19 on the labor market of Saudi Arabia: The role of universities for a sustainable workforce. Sustainability, 12(17): 7090. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12177090   [Google Scholar]
  7. Arrow K (1973). Some ordinalist-utilitarian notes on Rawls’s theory of justice. Journal of Philosophy, 70(9): 245-263. https://doi.org/10.2307/2025006   [Google Scholar]
  8. Assaad R and Krafft C (2013). The Egypt labor market panel survey: Introducing the 2012 round. IZA Journal of Labor & Development, 2: 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-9020-2-8   [Google Scholar]
  9. Badrolhisam NI and Omar N (2022). Perceived traits for future women academic leaders in Malaysian higher education institutions. International Journal of Academic Research in Economics and Management Sciences, 11(1): 262-284. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJAREMS/v11-i1/11692   [Google Scholar]
  10. Becker G (1993). Human capital. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226041223.001.0001   [Google Scholar]
  11. Beton Kalmaz D (2023). Asymmetric link between economic well-being and labour market equity in Turkey. International Journal of Development Issues, 22(2): 182-197. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJDI-12-2022-0270   [Google Scholar]
  12. Bhalla R and Meher S (2019). Education, employment and economic growth with special reference to females in Kerala. The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 62(4): 639-658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41027-019-00197-2   [Google Scholar]
  13. Bills CA (2018). Female labor force participation and tertiary education: A case study of India and Brazil. PhD Dissertation, Faculty of the Department of International Studies, Fordham University, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  14. Bridges S, Lawson D, and Begum S (2011). Labor market outcomes in Bangladesh: The role of poverty and gender norms. The European Journal of Development Research, 23(3): 459-487. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2011.14   [Google Scholar]
  15. Bursztyn L, Cappelen AW, Tungodden B, Voena A, and Yanagizawa-Drott DH (2023). How are gender norms perceived? No. w31049, National Bureau of Economic Research, New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.3386/w31049   [Google Scholar]
  16. Christensen P and Osman A (2023). The demand for mobility: Evidence from an experiment with Uber riders. No. w31330, National Bureau of Economic Research, New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.3386/w31330   [Google Scholar]
  17. Doğan B and Akyüz M (2017). Female labor force participation rate and economic growth in the framework of Kuznets curve: evidence from Turkey. Review of Economic and Business Studies, 10(1): 33-54. https://doi.org/10.1515/rebs-2017-0047   [Google Scholar]
  18. Elhadary Y and Abdelatti H (2024). Gender equality at public universities in Saudi Arabia: Achievements and ambitions. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 14(4): 40-59. https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2024-0084   [Google Scholar]
  19. Elhadary Y and Ahmed A (2024). Exploring the impact of massification of higher education on the labor force participation and empowerment of Malaysian women. Asian Development Policy Review, 12(3): 243-263. https://doi.org/10.55493/5008.v12i3.5134   [Google Scholar]
  20. Elhadary Y and Samat N (2023). Addressing gender disparity in public universities of Malaysia: Challenges and achievements. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 23(14): 156-172. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v23i14.6390   [Google Scholar]
  21. Fatima A and Sultana H (2009). Tracing out the u‐shape relationship between female labor force participation rate and economic development for Pakistan. International Journal of Social Economics, 36(1/2): 182-198. https://doi.org/10.1108/03068290910921253   [Google Scholar]
  22. Folke O and Rickne J (2022). Sexual harassment and gender inequality in the labor market. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 137(4): 2163-2212. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjac018   [Google Scholar]
  23. Goldin C (1994). The u-shaped female labor force function in economic development and economic history. Working Papers 4707, National Bureau of Economic Research, New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.3386/w4707   [Google Scholar]
  24. Halim D, O’Sullivan MB, and Sahay A (2023). Increasing female labor force participation. World Bank Group Gender Thematic Policy Notes Series: Evidence and Practice Note, Washington D.C., USA. https://doi.org/10.1596/39435   [Google Scholar]
  25. Heath R, Bernhardt A, Borker G, Fitzpatrick A, Keats A, McKelway M, Menzel A, Molina T, and Sharma G (2024). Female labor force participation. VoxDevLit, 11(1): 1-43.   [Google Scholar]
  26. Idowu OO and Owoeye T (2019). Female labor force participation in African countries: An empirical analysis. Indian Journal of Human Development, 13(3): 278-293. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973703019895234   [Google Scholar]
  27. ILO (2022). Dissemination and analysis. International Labor Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.   [Google Scholar]
  28. Jayachandran S (2020). Social norms as a barrier to women's employment in developing countries. No. w27449, National Bureau of Economic Research, New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.3386/w27449   [Google Scholar]
  29. Klasen S (2019). What explains uneven female labor force participation levels and trends in developing countries? The World Bank Research Observer, 34(2): 161-197. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkz005   [Google Scholar]
  30. Lang K and Kropp D (1986). Human capital versus sorting: The effects of compulsory attendance laws. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 101(3): 609-624. https://doi.org/10.2307/1885699   [Google Scholar]
  31. Lang K and Manove M (2011). Education and labor market discrimination. American Economic Review, 101(4): 1467-1496. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.4.1467   [Google Scholar]
  32. Li OL and Bakar NAA (2021). Determinants of female labor force participation rate: evidence from Malaysia. International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Management, 3(11): 205-217.   [Google Scholar]
  33. Mokhtar AS (2020). Women in senior management in Malaysia: An intersectional analysis. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of the West England, Bristol, UK.   [Google Scholar]
  34. Nam S (1991). Determinants of female labor force participation: A study of Seoul, South Korea, 1970–1980. Sociological Forum, 6(4): 641-659. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01114405   [Google Scholar]
  35. Nielsson U and Steingrimsdottir H (2018). The signalling value of education across genders. Empirical Economics, 54(4): 1827-1854. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-017-1264-z   [Google Scholar]
  36. Ningrum PK, Pansombut T, and Ueranantasun A (2020). Text mining of online job advertisements to identify direct discrimination during job hunting process: A case study in Indonesia. PLOS ONE, 15(6): e0233746. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233746   [Google Scholar] PMid:32497044 PMCid:PMC7272088
  37. Olson-Strom S and Rao N (2020). Higher education for women in Asia. In: Sanger CS and Gleason NW (Eds.), Diversity and inclusion in global higher education: lessons from across Asia: 263-282. Springer Nature, Singapore, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1628-3_10   [Google Scholar]
  38. Pal S and Chaudhuri S (2020). Falling female labor force participation: an analysis of selected countries. Asian Journal of Economics, Finance and Management, 2(1): 154-164.   [Google Scholar]
  39. Pampel FC and Tanaka K (1986). Economic development and female labor force participation: A reconsideration. Social Forces, 64(3): 599-619. https://doi.org/10.2307/2578815   [Google Scholar]
  40. Pericles Rospigliosi A, Greener S, Bourner T, and Sheehan M (2014). Human capital or signalling, unpacking the graduate premium. International Journal of Social Economics, 41(5): 420-432. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-03-2013-0056   [Google Scholar]
  41. Petersen T and Togstad T (2006). Getting the offer: Sex discrimination in hiring. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 24(3): 239-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2006.06.001   [Google Scholar]
  42. Rosen S (1976). A theory of life earnings. Journal of Political Economy, 84(4, Part 2): S45-S67. https://doi.org/10.1086/260532   [Google Scholar]
  43. Salleh SNS and Mansor N (2022). Women and labor force participation in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 7(7): e001641. https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v7i7.1641   [Google Scholar]
  44. Saqib N (2016). Women empowerment and economic growth: empirical evidence from Saudi Arabia. Advances in Management and Applied Economics, 6(5): 79-92.   [Google Scholar]
  45. Schultz TW (1960). Capital formation by education. Journal of Political Economy, 68(6): 571-583. https://doi.org/10.1086/258393   [Google Scholar]
  46. Shuangshuang Y, Zhu W, Mughal N, Aparcana SI, and Muda I (2023). The impact of education and digitalization on female labour force participation in BRICS: An advanced panel data analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02020-2   [Google Scholar]
  47. Sinha JN (1965). Dynamics of female participation in economic activity in a developing economy. In the World Population Conference, UN Publication, Belgrade, Serbia.   [Google Scholar]
  48. Spence A (1974). Market signaling: Informational transfer in hiring and related screening processes. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  49. Sundari S (2019). Economic development and female labor force participation in Tamil Nadu: A test of the ‘u’ shape hypothesis. Economic Affairs, 64(4): 695-702. https://doi.org/10.30954/0424-2513.4.2019.3   [Google Scholar]
  50. Taheri E, Güven Lisaniler F, and Payaslioğlu C (2021). Female labor force participation: What prevents sustainable development goals from being realised in Iran? Sustainability, 13(21): 11918. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111918   [Google Scholar]
  51. Thaddeus KJ, Bih D, Nebong NM, Ngong CA, Mongo EA, Akume AD, and Onwumere JUJ (2022). Female labor force participation rate and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: “a liability or an asset.” Journal of Business and Socio-Economic Development, 2(1): 34-48. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBSED-09-2021-0118   [Google Scholar]
  52. UN (2022). Achieving gender equality and empower all women and girls. United Nations, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  53. WB (2021). Malaysia country gender note 2021. World Bank, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.   [Google Scholar]
  54. WB (2024). School enrollment, tertiary (% gross). World Bank, Washington D.C., USA.   [Google Scholar]
  55. Weimann-Sandig N (2020). Malaysia and its transition process towards more gender equality at the labor market. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 5(7): 7-22. https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v5i7.441   [Google Scholar]
  56. Yoong M (2020). Professional discourses, gender and identity in women's media. Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55544-3   [Google Scholar]