Although a slightly older dataset now, the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2018 still holds relevance for discussions about education in the Pakistan context. It reveals that female and male illiteracy in Punjab stands at 44% and 24% respectively. This stark disparity merits several discussions: not only is this gap especially pronounced in middle, secondary, and higher education, but has also hardly shown positive differences in these areas since 2008, either remaining constant or increasing by merely 1%. Furthermore, the Gini educational inequality index is 0.36 for males compared to 0.54 for females. The inequality is intersectional, and the gap is especially pronounced in Punjab’s rural areas like Rajanpur and Muzaffargarh, where the female index is 0.61. Poorer females are extremely disadvantaged: 0.43% of the poorest class have higher education, compared to 7.49% of the richest. The mean years of schooling is 2.3 years less for females compared to boys.

These statistics must be understood within Punjab’s sociopolitical dynamics, where 31% of people live below the poverty line, and the average number of children per family is 3.4. For many families, girls’ education comes down to preferences dictated by sociocultural and religious elements inhibiting women’s agency, while societal perceptions deem men more employable and thus their parents’ safety nets. Therefore, girls in poor families are 22% less likely to attend school than boys. In rural areas, lack of funding, school quality, female teachers, and inadequate infrastructure in girls' schools hinder educational attainment. Physical distance and travel time to school are major impediments to school continuation, as reputational and security concerns make parents uncomfortable with girls walking long distances alone, especially after puberty.

This large gap between female and male literacy, school enrolment, and completion is critical in many ways, but its economic angle requires special attention. Female education, though intrinsically necessary from a rights-based approach, is also instrumentally important because it affects economic growth. Gender inequality lowers the average level of human capital and economic growth.

For instance, growth models like that by Solow can help us understand how women’s participation in the economy can serve as a form of labour and investment. Less educated women will likely have fewer employment opportunities in the formal sector; the opportunity cost of bearing a child in terms of career forgone will be lower, prompting higher fertility rates. This will have implications for the resources mothers will have available to spend per child, the likelihood of better educational opportunity for their next generations, from which another cycle of higher fertility rates may emanate, perpetuating a cycle of poverty.

Furthermore, the extended Solow growth model divides male and female human capital into two distinct groups. Since male and female labour are imperfectly substitutable factors of production, if we keep employing males instead of females, the marginal productivity of male labour decreases. By feminising our labour force, and placing women in jobs they are inherently more able and suited for, marginal productivity of female labour and marginal returns from education to the economy will increase. Self-selection dictates that even unwilling males are made to study, but by redistributing educational investments, high ability girls currently not studying can also become educated, increasing their productivity, substantiating the point that growth is indirectly affected through the impact of gender inequality on investment and population growth. Thus, demand and supply side educational policies targeting females that advance economic growth should greatly interest policymakers.

Existing policy options to raise demand for education include unconditional and conditional cash transfers, school fee reductions (non-merit-based scholarships and vouchers), merit-based scholarships, information-based interventions for females, and other more indirect household-based interventions, like providing information to mothers, or in-kind transfers like sanitary products. With Punjab’s high poverty rate, many families cannot cover hidden costs of schooling, making such interventions important. Entities like Kashf Foundation can be mobilised to provide subsidies, granted that schools uphold a minimum level of female enrolment, solving the challenge of families accepting transfers but not being regular with girls education.

On the other hand, supply-side metrics should cover three areas. Firstly, interventions that raise the quantity of schooling may include building new schools to reduce distance to the nearest school, making school days longer, hiring more teachers, and increasing teacher attendance. Overcrowded classrooms with a dismally low teacher-student ratio hampers effective in-class learning. A majority of Punjab’s public schools are primary schools; about 30% are middle and secondary schools. A shortage of schools becomes a leading cause of parents’ unwillingness to educate children because of long home-to-school distances and commute times that inevitably contribute to primary school dropout. If schools are located within the village, a girl’s primary school entry increases by 18% and dropout rate declines by 16%. Where middle and high schools are unavailable, and construction of new schools is infeasible, existing primary schools can be used as afternoon schools for the same objectives at a lower cost. Moreover, rural areas with empty lands can become makeshift evening schools till school structures are set up.

Secondly, interventions raising the quality of school services include provision of material inputs, making instruction more technology-enhanced, hiring more contract teachers, and using remedial education to fill gaps in females’ absolute learning levels. Lack of proper sanitation facilities become a major deterrent to continuing secondary school as girls reach puberty. With Punjab’s high smartphone penetration rate, whereby 94% of households report having access to at least one smartphone, remote technology-based learning is a real possibility to educate girls whose physical access to schooling is limited due to societal factors. Thirdly, other inputs can be provided such as meals and medical services, or learning outcomes can be enhanced via school management decentralisation. This would allow for a more community-based approach to female education to meet the needs of Punjab’s diverse population.

Owing to the highly gendered and polarised nature of our society, it is possible that increased education does not translate to improved agency or workforce access. Hence, certain nudges are required to persuade women, like segregated transport facilities and hostels, and imparting education to girls' families. Moreover, it must be realised that feminisation of labour, due to its reductionist and instrumental view, may also be used to exploit and underpay female labour, as in Bangladesh’s manufacturing industry. Therefore, sustainable adoption of the described solutions, using a female-centric grassroots approach, would be ideal.

Jovera Shakeel is a student at LUMS.