The pandemic is having very unequal effects across socioeconomic groups with vulnerable workers more at risk of losing their jobs (Chetty and others 2020, IMF 2021). More specifically, a growing literature has been examining the differences in labor market consequences of the COVID-19 crisis by gender. Many recent studies have argued that the crisis is causing a “she-cession,” where women’s labor market outcomes and prospects have deteriorated disproportionately (Albanesi and Kim 2021, Alon and others 2020, Caselli and others 2020, Fabrizio and others 2021, and Shibata 2020, among others). This pattern contrasts with the “man-cession” observed after the global financial crisis in which men appeared to be much more heavily impacted, according to U.S. studies (Wall 2009; Hoynes, Miller, and Schaller 2012).

There has been vigorous debate on the underlying drivers of the COVID-19 crisis’s asymmetric labor market impact by gender, with several factors cited. First, women’s employment shares are higher in contact-intensive sectors which have been more severely affected (Mongey, Pilossoph, and Weinberg 2020 and Albanesi and Kim 2021). Second, women tend to carry a higher childcare burden when schools are closed (Adams-Prassal and others 2020, Fuchs-Schündeln and others 2020, Hupkau and Petrongolo 2020, Russell and Sun 2021, and Zamarro and Prados 2020). Third, women are more often employed in temporary and part-time jobs that are more at risk of being terminated in a downturn (Petrongolo 2004 and Bahn and Sanchez Cumming 2020). All these factors contributed to the she-cession in the first months of the pandemic, with women’s unemployment rising disproportionately more than that of men in several countries.

While most studies discussing the pandemic’s economic consequences by gender focus on the U.S. or a few advanced economies, this paper examines the labor market impacts of the COVID-19 crisis by gender at quarterly frequency for a large panel of 30 advanced economies and 8 emerging market economies, expanding upon the aggregate findings on gender differences by economy group of IMF (2021) and making three key contributions. First, we document the extent and persistence of COVID-19 crisis-related she-cessions across countries within 2020, where a she-cession is called for a quarter in 2020 when there is a negative difference between women’s and men’s employment rate (employment-to-population ratio) changes compared with 2019 (that is, women are losing more jobs than men as a share of population). Second, we quantify the role of sectoral employment composition in gender differences in labor market outcomes. Third, we further elaborate on recent labor market dynamics by gender, examining the relative importance of the intensive versus extensive margins by gender (average hours worked versus employment) and movements in unemployment versus labor force participation that underlie employment changes by gender.

We find that over half to two-thirds of the countries in our sample experienced she-cessions in 2020:Q2, depending on whether the gap change is gauged as a percentage point or percent change. By contrast, only about 8 percent of the countries in our sample experienced a she-cession during the depths of the global financial crisis (2009:Q2). Moreover, the COVID-19 crisis she-cessions tend to be short-lived, fading by 2020:Q3 for three-fifths to two-thirds of countries.

The analysis of sectoral employment patterns reveals that COVID-19 she-cessions are associated with drops in women’s sectoral employment shares, particularly in sectors accounting for more of women’s total employment. For countries where we have sectoral employment by gender, almost all of those which experienced she-cessions were predominantly driven by declining women’s shares in employment within sectors.

The employment rate is a standard measure of overall labor market conditions that captures the extensive margin of labor utilization. However, it can mask changes in other margins that may be of interest. The employment rate misses labor market adjustments in hours worked (the intensive margin of labor), which could be significant with the widespread deployment of short-term work schemes to preserve job links while enabling reductions in employers’ labor costs through reductions in working hours (Giupponi and Landais 2020; IMF COVID-19 Policy Tracker). The labor force participation margin may be particularly important in understanding the consequences of the COVID-19 recession by gender.2 As noted before, women may have opted out of the labor market in greater numbers to care for their children who are not in school. Moreover, early in the COVID-19 recession, entire sectors had to shut down, leading some laid-off workers to simply cease participating in the labor market (Coibion, Gorodnichenko, and Weber 2020).3 We find that men have typically seen average hours worked fall by more than women in our sample of countries. She-cession gender gap changes in the first three quarters of 2020 are far more evident along the extensive margin (employment) than the intensive margin (average hours worked). She-cession gender gap changes more often reflected larger declines in women’s than men’s labor force participation rates than relative rises in women’s unemployment rates. The average narrowing of she-cession gender gap changes in employment as of 2020:Q3 appears to arise from both relative improvements in labor force participation by women and shrinking of unemployment rate differences.

Understanding and unpacking the heterogeneity and persistence of the pandemic’s effect by gender are essential to assessing both the short-term and potential medium-term effects of the crisis. The consequences for job losers can be dire, as they face earnings losses and difficulties in finding a job after unemployment spells, leading to some scarring (IMF 2021). Policies to support adversely impacted workers over the near term—such as wage subsidies—can help mitigate these losses. Women’s employment may also be particularly sensitive to measures that help alleviate childcare burdens (Vuri 2016). Even after the pandemic abates, some of the effects on the structure of employment may persist, with some sectors permanently shrinking and others growing. For these persistent effects, the speed with which economies can reemploy and reallocate impacted workers across sectors—for example, through training and hiring incentives—will determine how long-lived the effects on employment are. Recent studies pointing to the productivity increases associated with gender diversity at all levels of the workforce suggest that targeting gender gaps specifically could generate a double benefit: improvements in overall labor market conditions and a productivity boon (Elborgh-Woytek and others 2013; Gonzales and others 2015).

There are some potential channels by which the COVID-19 recession could have long-lasting, asymmetric adverse effects on women’s prospects that may not be visible in recent employment trends. Some recent survey results suggest that women are more likely to be rethinking career decisions in light of the pandemic (Romei 2021), which could mean that the crisis leads to a future drop in women’s labor force participation. Moreover, career interruptions that fall more heavily on women from the COVID-19 crisis could adversely impact their longer-term earnings and employment prospects (Albrecht and others 1999, Aisenbrey, Evertsson, and Grunow 2009).