The History of Women and International Trade

In the 20^th century, the role of women in international trade policy has been limited because women have had limited access to government positions within democracies. After World War II, women found greater opportunity to engage in policy making. The modern global economic landscape emerged at the Bretton Woods Conference in New Hampshire in 1944, the middle of World War II, when Roosevelt gathered world leaders to design the post war world. Bretton Woods was selected as the location because it had pleasant weather in the summer. John Maynard Keynes, the father of Keynesian economics, was a native of England and requested that the conference not take place in the sweltering Washington, DC heat. Delegates from 30 members and only China had a comparable number of delegates to the US.

The conference resulted in the development of two organizations that have defined the 20^th century: the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. The US goal was to center the dollar in currency comparisons, and to loan money to developing countries. The centerpiece of the conference was GPD, a newish measure of economic success, one that ignored volunteer and unpaid labor, often done by women and rewarded trade that was financial, even when the product was harmful to society, like the trade of cigarettes or drugs.

Not surprisingly, there were few women at Bretton Woods, and only two were official delegates: Mrs. L.J. Gouseva and Dr. Mabel Newcomer. Dr. Newcomer was a professor of economics at Vassar College. During the war, she consulted with the US Treasury because her expertise was on taxation. She was especially concerned with post war inflation, as was seen after World War I. She was one of three women nominated as a delegate and was the only one officially designated. Although not an expert on international trade, few women were, she had long been of service to the government and worked on committees that outlined the terms and mission of the IMF and World Bank. It is rumored that First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt personally selected her. In these discussions, Newcomer was often the only woman at the table. After the conference, her responsibility was to sell the organizations to American women with a lecture series.

Men Gather at the Opening Ceremonies for the Bretton Woods Conference[1]

With so few women present, it is not surprising that gender and racial equality were not top priority at the conference, but closer examination makes clear it should be. The International Labour Organization’s Declaration of Philadelphia from earlier that year explicitly called for international economic policy to advance equality regardless of race, creed, or sex, and it urged delegates at the upcoming Bretton Woods conference to evaluate their postwar financial plans through this human-rights lens. The declaration was supported publicly by President Roosevelt and made clear that universal freedoms were directly connected to postwar reconstruction. In essence, it was a commitment to combating gender inequality and racial discrimination. A year later, these principles appeared in the UN Charter, which committed member states to promoting human rights. In fact, Eleanor Roosevelt was unanimously appointed to the first UN General Assembly and later became the chair of the commission that drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Given this context, why wasn’t it central at Bretton Woods?

Despite this strong contemporary push, the Bretton Woods conference almost entirely ignored questions of gender and race. Aside from a vague acknowledgment of women’s economic participation by Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau and a few general comments contrasting the conference’s goals with Nazi racism, discussions of discrimination played no meaningful role in shaping the IMF or World Bank Articles of Agreement.

Unfortunately, women’s engagement in international trade policy development happened wherever women won elections or government officials appointed women to these key positions. However, since female graduates in economics still drags behind other social sciences and humanities programs, women were less often in positions to assume those roles.

Then, in 1995, international cooperation and trade policies reached a turning point. That year the World Trade Organization was formed to support policy and agreements over not only goods, but also services and intellectual property. WTO membership expanded to 166 members over the last several decades and supports almost all international trade.

Meeting of the World Trade Organization in 1998[2]

Roslyn Jackson’s appointment in 1999 as the first woman director at the WTO marked an early and important breakthrough. As head of the former Statistics Division, the Australian official brought new visibility to women’s leadership inside an institution still defining its post-GATT identity. Jackson’s tenure opened a door that others would soon push wider. Among them was Valentine Rugwabiza of Rwanda, who became the first, and so far only, woman to serve as the WTO’s Deputy Director-General. Her leadership, spanning roles in Geneva and at the United Nations, underscored the increasing influence of women from the Global South in the global trade arena.

Across the organization, women began stepping into key governing and negotiating roles. Elin Østebø Johansen of Norway became the first European woman to chair both the Dispute Settlement Body and the General Council, two of the WTO’s most central decision-making bodies. Her tenure—preceded by chairmanships of the Goods and Services Councils—demonstrated a deep command of the institution’s rulemaking machinery and an ability to broker consensus in turbulent times. In Asia, Sunanta Kangvalkulkij added another historic milestone as the first Asian woman to chair the General Council, building on her prior leadership of the Dispute Settlement Body and representing a new generation of ambassadors shaping the WTO’s institutional direction.

Women have also left an indelible mark on global trade policy from outside the WTO’s internal ranks. As EU Trade Commissioner, Cecilia Malmström played a pivotal role in expanding the European Union’s network of preferential trade agreements, concluding landmark deals with partners such as Canada, Japan, and Singapore. Her leadership on behalf of the EU at the Nairobi and Buenos Aires Ministerial Conferences ensured that women’s voices helped shape the political currents of multilateral trade negotiations. In the United States, Susan Schwab guided major trade initiatives as U.S. Trade Representative, including the resolution of the decades-long softwood lumber dispute with Canada and key agreements that facilitated Russia’s accession to the WTO.

EU Trade Commissioner, Cecilia Malmström at a Press Conference[3]

At the operational and technical core of the organization, women have continued to redefine what leadership means. Xiaolin Chai became the first Chinese national to direct a division at the WTO when she assumed charge of the Trade in Services and Investment Division, reflecting the growing importance of services trade and the increasing diversification of the WTO’s senior staff. From Zambia, Bridget Chilala brought decades of negotiating experience to her role as Director of the Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation, shaping the capacity-building efforts that help developing countries engage more effectively in the global trading system.

Despite the expressed commitment to gender and racial equality, it was not until recently that international bodies developed the training programs to recruit and prepare women for work in international trade. The International Trade Centre (ITC), a joint agency of the WTO and the UN, launched the Women and Trade Programme and the ITC SheTrades Initiative in 2015. There are also organizations working to advance women in international trade not associated with governing bodies. The Association of Women in International Trade (WIIT), for example, based in Washington DC, works to promote the professional development of women in international trade and business and to raise public awareness of the importance of international trade to economic development.

The Importance of Global Trade for Women

In general, engaging in trade has proven to be extremely positive for the development, maintenance, and growth of economies in all parts of the world and is known to increase productivity, wages, employment opportunities, and resources for people in many demographics—but for women, the impact of investment in global trade cannot be understated. Global trade has been a game changer for individual women’s financial independence. International trade expands the types of work that citizens can engage in. Although these patterns are true for many people, women have especially seen economic gains as countries decide to begin or increase their foreign trade and relations.

Firms that participate in international trade employ significantly more women and provide better working conditions than those that do not. In developing countries, women make up about one-third of the workforce in exporting firms, compared with only a quarter in non-exporting ones. Their representation is even higher in global value chain firms and foreign-owned companies, where women comprise roughly 37% of employees, over ten percentage points higher than in domestic firms.[4] In countries such as Morocco, Romania, and Vietnam, exporting industries employ half or more of all female workers, collectively providing jobs for more than five million women. This access to global markets not only expands employment opportunities but also helps raise women’s earnings. When developing countries double their manufacturing exports, women’s share of total manufacturing wages typically increases by nearly six percentage points due to higher employment and improved pay. This is good not just for women, but for everyone.

Countries without investments in foreign trade and firms that engage beyond their borders are more likely to employ people in “informal work.”  Informal work, also called a “gray economy” is work that is done without or with minimal financial compensation. Informal workers may be “paid” under a barter system, non-monetary way, or far less than global market value. Informal work lacks the job security and benefits that often come from formal work. The expansion of international markets has opened doors to formal employment for people across demographics, but especially women, opening opportunity for jobs that provide greater pay, stability, and protection. Women are the overwhelming majority of informal workers. Global trade also contributes to narrowing the wage gap and promoting economic equality, particularly in regions like Africa. Under the African Continental Free Trade Area, projections suggest that by 2035, women’s wages could rise by around 4%, outpacing men’s gains, adding the equivalent of two extra weeks of pay annually for many women.[5] For women, the likelihood of informal employment drops from 20% in low-export sectors to just 13% in high-export ones, a steeper decline than for men. As nations deepen their participation in foreign trade, more women transition into formal sectors, narrowing gender gaps in income and opportunity.

It's not just about money in their pocket, informal work is connected to much poorer health outcomes, both physically and mentally, but, in many circumstances, is the only option for work outside the home available to many women around the world.[6] It’s important to note that maternal health is not only important for women’s lives, but it is indicative of the lives of their children. Breastfeeding mothers need to be especially healthy to pass on adequate nutrition to their offspring. One metanalysis found there was an association between informal employment and worse health outcomes and especially showed poor child and infant nutritional health.

Share of female workers in informal employment, 2024 from Our World in Data[7]

Sectors that have integrated women, women work informally much less frequently, less than 20%, depending on location.[8] It’s important to note that informal work is incredibly rare for men, less than 10% in recent studies. The example of informal work works to show the importance of investment in global trade to elevating the status and financial bargaining power of women. Global trade is directly related to the rise in formal jobs for women around the world. Formal jobs give women a safer path toward financial security and freedom as individuals.

Additionally, companies and firms that export also hire women at a much higher rate than those which do not export: women make up 33% of the workforce in the former and only 24% in the latter in developing countries.[9] Not only are more women hired in companies that are integrated in the global economy, but they are also compensated more, with women’s wages being 2.5% higher when they are employed by a business that exports globally. Finally, when countries double their manufacturing exports, women tend to increase their share of total manufacturing wages by 24-30%.[10]

The Global Gender Gap

The global gender gap remains deeply entrenched in international trade, which falls under the World Economic Forum’s category of “economic participation and opportunity.” While educational attainment and health gaps have largely closed, women continue to face structural barriers in trade as consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs. Women pay more for imported goods due to tariff disparities, compete for fewer formal jobs in global value chains where men dominate two-thirds of positions, and face discrimination in entrepreneurship through limited financing and bureaucratic corruption. Compounding these challenges, women remain underrepresented in trade leadership, with only a fraction serving as ambassadors or ministers in the World Trade Organization. Together, these inequalities reveal how economic, political, and social factors intersect to maintain women’s exclusion from the full benefits of global commerce.

Women-owned businesses and firms that take on a global trade approach are in scarcity compared to male-owned. In developing countries, men own almost all of manufacturing and service firms, less than a fifth of businesses with a global stake are run by women. Encouragingly, efforts to correct these disparities are gaining traction among policymakers and businesses. The economic case for accelerating change is compelling: closing the trade-related gender gap could add as much as US $12 trillion to global GDP by 2025, while individual firms that achieve greater gender diversity consistently report stronger financial performance.[11] Achieving true equality in trade, therefore, is not only a moral imperative but also a pragmatic pathway to collective prosperity.

Where women become entrepreneurs, women’s lives become easier because goods and services are designed with them in mind. Unfortunately, women entrepreneurs continue to receive only a fraction of venture capital funding, about 2–3% overall and just 1% in the UK. (EY Global). It has long been established in studies that diversity drives innovation in the economy: inclusive companies are 1.7 times more likely to lead in creativity and problem-solving.[12] Sadly, women are less likely to build their businesses internationally because women face gender discrimination in their home country on the basis of education, financial independence, and unshared domestic duties.

Women make up a major portion of service sector employees, but the international exportation of services is difficult by technological and policy constraints. Since 2005, trade in services has grown about 17% faster than trade in goods, making the sector a key contributor to inclusive development. Between 1991 and 2017, women’s employment in services rose sharply, from 45% to over two-thirds in upper-middle- and high-income countries, and from 25% to 38% in lower-income nations, outpacing men’s transition into the field.[13] As economies advance, service-sector jobs increasingly require specialized skills, leading more women into high-skill occupations such as management, health care, and education. Women now make up nearly 40% of high-skilled service workers in high-income countries, a 33% increase since 1991.[14] Participation in global value chains has expanded women’s access to formal, better-paid work. Women in global value chain linked industries are ten percentage points more likely to hold formal jobs, and firms engaged in exporting, importing, or foreign ownership consistently employ more women than those that are not globally integrated.[15]

Still, it would be a lot easier for women to extend their businesses across borders if governments didn’t institute tariff policies that disproportionally targeted goods consumed by women.

The Pink Tariff and Connection to Consumer Power

Although overall US tariff rates have fallen significantly with entry into the World Trade Organization and the expansion of free trade agreements, sexism and gender discrimination has found a way to permeate the world of trade policy. The connection between gender and these types of policies have been named the Pink Tariff, the policy reason behind the “Pink Tax” discussed in the last chapter, because of the gendered way these monetary systems affect women workers and consumers. Economic sectors that usually have a higher percentage of women workers over men workers see higher tariffs for trading; these sectors include food and beverages and textiles and apparel. These types of restrictions have negative implications in all aspects of the supply chain. High tariffs inherently lead to less competition, since fewer businesses are willing to pay more money to export. Less competition in this sense also leads to less hiring competition, which, in this case, directly affects jobs that are normally taken up by women.

In the United States, research shows that goods primarily purchased by women often face steeper import tariffs than those marketed to men. For example, between 2006 and 2016, women’s apparel carried an additional tariff cost of about $2.77 billion compared to men’s clothing, with the disparity growing over time.[16] Because women tend to spend more on imported consumer goods, lowering these tariffs would directly reduce their cost of living and enhance their purchasing power. Despite clothing representing only 6% of total imports, it generates nearly half of US tariff revenue.[17] The persistence of these high rates, reinforced during the US-China trade war when punitive apparel tariffs rose even higher, underscores a strong protectionist stance in this sector. While the federal government sets the tariff schedules in the United States, there is currently no law that prohibits gender discrimination in the pricing of products for consumers.

The Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the US further complicates matters by classifying apparel and footwear not only by material and construction but also by gender, an approach not adopted internationally. As of 2014, 86% of US apparel imports and 79% of footwear imports were gender-classified, with 155 categories for men’s items and 160 for women’s.[18] Many of these carry different tariff rates based solely on gender, often to the detriment of women, with 78 provisions explicitly imposing unequal rates between men’s and women’s goods.[19]

Similar patterns appear across developing nations. In a study of 54 countries, removing import tariffs was projected to raise real incomes for female-headed households in more than three-quarters of them. These households typically allocate a larger portion of their spending to agricultural products, food, that are often subject to higher tariffs, while relying less on wage income and more on home production, social benefits, and transfers. As a result, tariff elimination could increase women’s real income by as much as 2.5% more than that of male-headed households.16 In nations like Burkina Faso and Cameroon, removing trade-related gender biases could provide financial gains comparable to a family’s yearly spending on education or health care, underscoring how fairer trade policies can meaningfully advance women’s welfare.

Columbia Watches as Washington Passes Bills that Impact Her Business[20]

Women Leaders on Trade Policy

The limitations to expanding global trade and women’s businesses internationally can be overcome at the policy level, but this will require women to overcome political hurdles to get women at the negotiating table. As of 2023, women held only 22.8% of cabinet-level posts worldwide, most often in social rather than economic ministries.[21] Increasing female leadership in trade policy could strengthen focus on women’s issues and expand opportunities for equitable participation. Some countries are making strides toward this goal. Chile pioneered the inclusion of gender chapters in its free-trade agreements with Uruguay, Canada, and Argentina. This important focus on gender in trade agreements can help focus national energy and domestic policy toward those ends, but it will remain to be seen if these are merely symbolic. Canada advanced this model further in its 2019 FTA with Israel, making gender provisions subject to binding dispute resolution. Globally, over 80 trade agreements now explicitly reference gender, and well over 250 when clauses embedded in these agreements are examined.[22] Real change will require more than words, but deeds and enforceable mechanisms embedded in the trade agreement language to ensure nations follow through.

Accelerating progress toward gender parity in global trade requires coordinated efforts across governments, international organizations, businesses, and civil society. While free-trade agreements have become a focal point for embedding gender equality into trade policy, real progress also depends on domestic laws, institutional programs, and community initiatives. International bodies like the World Trade Organization, the United Nations, and the World Bank have instituted programs to enhance women’s economic participation and provide data-driven insights.[23] Governments can further narrow the gender trade gap by improving women’s access to finance, mobility, and information. Strategies include enforcing gender-based procurement standards, creating women-centered training programs. Tailored information networks and mentorship opportunities are equally crucial.

Tracking economic trade by gender and gendered impact is also crucial to improve policy. Data collection needs to be gender-disaggregated, where genders are broken down so that disparate impacts can be adequately measured, rather than lumping the genders together. Good data is essential to sustain these reforms and measure their impact. The private sector also benefits from gender-sensitive data, which reveals inequities in areas ranging from vehicle safety to financial advising. For meaningful and lasting change, businesses must turn rhetoric into action, lobbying for stronger gender policies, appointing more women to decision-making roles, and prioritizing partnerships with women-led firms. If these stakeholders act collaboratively, closing the gender gap in international trade could happen within decades rather than the current projection of 131 years.[24]

Conclusion

The intersection of gender and international trade reveals both the transformative potential and the persistent inequities of globalization. While global trade has undeniably opened doors for women, offering greater access to formal employment, higher wages, and entrepreneurial pathways, it has also exposed how deeply structural inequalities remain embedded in economic systems. Women continue to face barriers rooted in unequal access to capital, education, and global value chains, all of which limit their ability to compete on equal footing. Moreover, the persistence of gendered trade policies, such as the “Pink Tariff” and “Pink Tax,” underscores how market mechanisms can perpetuate bias even as they promise opportunity.

True gender parity in global trade requires more than open markets; it demands intentional policy reform and gender-responsive data that illuminate where disparities persist. Empowering women as workers, entrepreneurs, and consumers strengthens not only individual livelihoods but also the broader global economy. As nations reconsider their trade frameworks in an increasingly interconnected world, the inclusion and advancement of women must become a central measure of economic success—not a peripheral goal.

[1] National Archives and Records Administration, “Coe Bretton Woods Conference,” 1944. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coe_Bretton_Woods_1944.jpg.

[2] World Trade Organization. “Geneva Ministerial Conference.” May 18, 1998. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Geneva_Ministerial_Conference_18-20_May_1998_(9305956531).jpg.

[3] Andrej Klizan. “European Commission, Mrs. Cecilia Malmström, European Commissioner for Trade.” Photograph. September 16, 2016. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PRESS_CONFERENCE_2016-09-23_(29249003564).jpg.

[4] World Trade Organization, “Women and Trade: The Role of Trade in Promoting Gender Equality,” Washington, DC: World Bank Group, July 30 2020, https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/women_trade_pub2807_e.pdf, p.3.

[5] World Trade Organization, “Women and Trade: The Role of Trade in Promoting Gender Equality,” Washington, DC: World Bank Group, July 30 2020, https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/women_trade_pub2807_e.pdf, p.3.

[6] Emma Aronssoon, Pilar Vidaurre-Teixidó, Magnus Rom Jensen, Solvor Solhaug & Courtney McNamara, “The health consequences of informal employment among female workers and their children: a systematic review,” BioMed Central 19, no. 59 (2023): 1, https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12992-023-00958-1#citeas.

[7] “Data Page: Share of female workers in informal employment”. Our World in Data (2026). Data adapted from International Labour Organization. Retrieved from https://archive.ourworldindata.org/20260130-180113/grapher/share-in-informal-employment-female.html [online resource] (archived on January 30, 2026). All data, visualizations, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license.

[8] World Trade Organization, “Women and Trade,” p.5.

[9] World Trade Organization, “Women and Trade,” p.5.

[10] World Trade Organization, “Women and Trade,” p.5.

[11] Sally Jones, “Why the Gender Gap in International Trade Needs to Close Faster,” EY Global, May 16, 2023, https://www.ey.com/en_gl/insights/global-trade/why-the-gender-gap-in-international-trade-needs-to-close-faster.

[12] Sally Jones, “Why the Gender Gap in International Trade Needs to Close Faster.”

[13] Sally Jones, “Why the Gender Gap in International Trade Needs to Close Faster.”

[14] Sally Jones, “Why the Gender Gap in International Trade Needs to Close Faster.”

[15] Sally Jones, “Why the Gender Gap in International Trade Needs to Close Faster.”

[16] World Trade Organization, “Women and Trade,” p.5.

[17] Miranda Hatch, “Is Trade Sexist? How “Pink” Tariff Policies’ Harmful Effects Can Is Trade Sexist? How “Pink” Tariff Policies’ Harmful Effects Can Be Curtailed Through Litigation and Legislation Be Curtailed Through Litigation and Legislation”, BYU Law Review Volume 47 Issue 2 (2023): 656 https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3351&context=lawreview.

[18] Miranda Hatch, “Is Trade Sexist?” p.657.

[19] Miranda Hatch, “Is Trade Sexist?” p.657.

[20] Charles Lewis Bartholomew. “The Eyes of the Country are on Washington.” This file was contributed to Wikimedia Commons by Hennepin County Library as part of a cooperation project. The donation was facilitated by the Digital Public Library of America, via its partner Minnesota Digital Library. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Eyes_Of_the_Country_Are_On_Washington_-_DPLA_-_afec65eb07dd4625645597a76bc6dc28.jpg.

[21] World Trade Organization, “Women and Trade,” p.5.

[22] World Trade Organization, “Women and Trade,” p.5.

[23] Sally Jones, “Why the Gender Gap in International Trade Needs to Close Faster.”

[24] Sally Jones, “Why the Gender Gap in International Trade Needs to Close Faster.”