An overview of women’s work and employment in Azerbaijan
13.3%, whereas the equivalent shares mentioned for 1995 and 2003 were 6.9% respectively 12.2%. Across
countries, the 2003 and 2005 shares are high too. Moreover, they suggest a trend toward grower equality in
consumption and income (Republic of Azerbaijan 2005; ADB 2009a; UNDP 2008; IMF 2008; UN MDG
Indicators).
Various research outcomes question the above outcomes, though most researchers do not deny the de-
velopment in the last decade towards less poverty and greater equality. First, under-reporting of expenditure
in the higher income categories is rather common, also in Azerbaijan, implying that unequality is underesti-
mated: the current Gini coefficient gives a too sunny picture. Second, the share of “working poor” may be
underestimated, most likely through statistics not capturing the underemployed: those who work less than
full time and hence cannot earn enough to rise above the poverty line and those who apparently work full
time but at low intensity. In poor rural areas the incidence of both groups seems considerable. Third, in
the early 2000s it became clear that the average level of social assistance (in spite of more than 35 types of
social benefits!) and pensions lagged behind the average wage level. In spite of an increase in pensions in
2003, the average pension amount represented two-thirds of the poverty line (Republic of Azerbaijan 2005,
29-30, 33-5).
Indeed, the same sources as cited above also deliver a grim picture of more persistent poverty. Also
according to the 2003 HBS, close to 3.7 million people or about 45% of the total population, lived in pov-
erty, consuming less than USD 36.50 per capita per month or less than 70% of the median consumption
expenditure in 2002. Among these, a group of 800,000 persons, almost 10% of the total population, lived
in extreme poverty with monthly consumption below USD 25.50 per month. Poverty and economic vulner-
ability define the daily lives of many men, women, and children; few of these poor, including women, are
able to resist even the slightest income “shocks” to their welfare because they have few assets or savings to
cushion the fall-out from loss of employment or even the loss of an elderly family member who contributed
pension income. Economic vulnerability has increased: the breakdown of family and community kinship
obligations and the weakening of traditional social networks has weakened the social safety net upon which
many poor women and men have long relied (ADB 2005, 7; Republic of Azerbaijan 2005).
In Azerbaijan economic independence is far-away for many women, in particular for many young wom-
en. Female-headed households are much more locked in poverty than male-headed households. According
to the 2005 HBS, nearly 40% of the households run by 18-29-year-old women were in the poorest 10% of
the population (against 28% of households headed by men of the same age), whereas this held for 23% of
Page • 33