Nobel Prize in Economics Awarded to Harvard’s Claudia Goldin for Work on Gender Gaps
Kanebridge News
    HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $1,730,998 (-1.35%)       Melbourne $1,052,750 (-0.63%)       Brisbane $1,213,162 (-0.55%)       Adelaide $1,088,669 (-1.01%)       Perth $1,109,065 (-0.03%)       Hobart $857,011 (-0.15%)       Darwin $850,231 (-5.88%)       Canberra $1,057,418 (+2.13%)       National Capitals $1,179,457 (-0.85%)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $812,882 (-0.02%)       Melbourne $547,522 (-0.39%)       Brisbane $775,633 (-1.81%)       Adelaide $583,866 (+1.25%)       Perth $661,533 (-0.91%)       Hobart $583,528 (+2.34%)       Darwin $488,291 (-0.29%)       Canberra $502,282 (+1.20%)       National Capitals $640,074 (-0.20%)                HOUSES FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 14,388 (-149)       Melbourne 16,400 (-697)       Brisbane 9,524 (+147)       Adelaide 2,995 (+70)       Perth 7,340 (+170)       Hobart 758 (-2)       Darwin 142 (+4)       Canberra 1,228 (-5)       National Capitals 52,775 (-462)                UNITS FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,737 (+19)       Melbourne 6,931 (-54)       Brisbane 1,794 (+10)       Adelaide 449 (+21)       Perth 1,390 (+12)       Hobart 145 (-6)       Darwin 212 (+3)       Canberra 1,245 (+31)       National Capitals 21,903 (+36)                HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $870 ($0)       Melbourne $610 (+$10)       Brisbane $700 ($0)       Adelaide $650 ($0)       Perth $750 ($0)       Hobart $625 ($0)       Darwin $875 (+$25)       Canberra $730 (-$20)       National Capitals $739 (+$3)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $815 (-$5)       Melbourne $630 ($0)       Brisbane $680 ($0)       Adelaide $555 (-$5)       Perth $700 ($0)       Hobart $545 (+$45)       Darwin $655 (+$5)       Canberra $600 ($0)       National Capitals $658 (+$3)                HOUSES FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 6,162 (+59)       Melbourne 7,192 (+17)       Brisbane 3,645 (-54)       Adelaide 1,428 (+38)       Perth 2,339 (-34)       Hobart 280 (+15)       Darwin 38 (-7)       Canberra 456 (+28)       National Capitals 21,540 (+62)                UNITS FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,135 (+92)       Melbourne 5,909 (+25)       Brisbane 1,996 (+38)       Adelaide 446 (-20)       Perth 714 (-5)       Hobart 70 (+3)       Darwin 78 (+8)       Canberra 695 (-26)       National Capitals 19,043 (+115)                HOUSE ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND       Sydney 2.61% (↑)      Melbourne 3.01% (↑)      Brisbane 3.00% (↑)      Adelaide 3.10% (↑)      Perth 3.52% (↑)      Hobart 3.79% (↑)      Darwin 5.35% (↑)        Canberra 3.59% (↓)     National Capitals 3.26% (↑)             UNIT ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 5.21% (↓)     Melbourne 5.98% (↑)      Brisbane 4.56% (↑)        Adelaide 4.94% (↓)     Perth 5.50% (↑)      Hobart 4.86% (↑)      Darwin 6.98% (↑)        Canberra 6.21% (↓)     National Capitals 5.34% (↑)             HOUSE RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 1.4% (↑)      Melbourne 1.5% (↑)      Brisbane 1.2% (↑)      Adelaide 1.2% (↑)      Perth 1.0% (↑)        Hobart 0.5% (↓)       Darwin 0.7% (↓)     Canberra 1.6% (↑)      National Capitals $1.1% (↑)             UNIT RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 1.4% (↑)      Melbourne 2.4% (↑)      Brisbane 1.5% (↑)      Adelaide 0.8% (↑)      Perth 0.9% (↑)      Hobart 1.2% (↑)        Darwin 1.4% (↓)     Canberra 2.7% (↑)      National Capitals $1.5% (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL HOUSES AND TREND       Sydney 32.7 (↑)      Melbourne 32.4 (↑)        Brisbane 33.3 (↓)     Adelaide 27.4 (↑)        Perth 37.9 (↓)       Hobart 27.4 (↓)     Darwin 27.7 (↑)      Canberra 29.7 (↑)      National Capitals 31.1 (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL UNITS AND TREND         Sydney 30.5 (↓)     Melbourne 29.9 (↑)      Brisbane 33.2 (↑)        Adelaide 21.3 (↓)       Perth 38.5 (↓)     Hobart 31.1 (↑)        Darwin 38.7 (↓)       Canberra 38.0 (↓)       National Capitals 32.6 (↓)           
Share Button

Nobel Prize in Economics Awarded to Harvard’s Claudia Goldin for Work on Gender Gaps

Economic historian and labour economist has tracked the changing fortunes of women in the workplace

By SARAH CHANEY CAMBON
Tue, Oct 10, 2023 8:48amGrey Clock 3 min

BOSTON—Harvard University’s Claudia Goldin is a labor economist, teacher and mentor. She is now also a Nobel Prize winner for her groundbreaking research on women in the workforce.

Goldin was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences on Monday, the third woman to receive the economics prize since the award started in 1969. The 77-year-old Harvard economist has spent decades analysing troves of data to produce research illuminating the history of women’s job-market experiences.

Goldin’s expansive work portfolio includes pieces on the drivers of female labor-force participation, the origins of the gender pay gap and hiring biases against women. Her paper, “Why Women Won,” which documented the evolution of women’s legal rights, published this month.

The winner of the 2023 Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel American economist Claudia Goldin is seen on a display at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, in Stockholm on October 9, 2023. (Photo by Jonathan NACKSTRAND / AFP) (Photo by JONATHAN NACKSTRAND/AFP via Getty Images)

“Goldin’s discoveries have vast societal implications,” said Randi Hjalmarsson, professor of economics at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden.

Goldin was admittedly tired upon entering Monday’s press conference at Harvard. She was, after all, asleep when she received the early-morning call with the news of her Nobel Prize. Still, her passion regarding decades of research and relationship-building radiated as she spoke at a press briefing.

“The increase of women in economics is important for a host of reasons,” Goldin said. “For me personally it has been important because I have had the most wonderful co-authors.”

One such co-researcher, Claudia Olivetti of Dartmouth College, said Goldin’s body of work has shaped much of the current research on women and labor markets. Perhaps less well known, Olivetti said, is Goldin’s extraordinary mentorship of women.

Goldin “has been a source of inspiration to many women in economics, generously sharing her experiences and demonstrating the possibilities of success,” Olivetti said.

Some professors view themselves as researchers, rather than teachers. Not Goldin.

“I could never do research without doing teaching,” she said. “When I teach, I am forced to confront what I think is the truth.”

Goldin was the first woman to secure tenure in Harvard’s economics department. She follows Esther Duflo in 2019 and Elinor Ostrom in 2009 as female recipients of the economics Nobel Prize.

Goldin is married to Lawrence Katz, also a Harvard economist. Both are avid bird watchers and hikers, colleagues said. She has a 13-year-old golden retriever named Pika and no children.

Around the world, 50% of women have paid jobs, compared with 80% of men, although that gap is smaller in advanced economies. Across the developed economies, women earn 13% less on average and are less likely to play senior roles in the organisations they work for.

Goldin’s research questioned the assumption that women had steadily, or would inevitably, narrow those gaps. Using data that had previously attracted little attention, she established that far fewer women worked in paid employment in the early 1900s than in 1800, while that share rebounded as the 20th century advanced, albeit slowly.

Her writing includes 1990’s “Understanding the Gender Gap: An Economic History of American Women.” Examining 200 years of data, Goldin tracked the changing fortunes of women in the workplace as it changed from farm to factory to office.

She also identified some of the considerations that affected the decisions made by women about their participation in the workforce, as well as the constraints they faced at particular times. In one well-known paper, she examined the effect of the contraceptive pill on decisions about work and marriage.

The pay gap between male and female workers had long been attributed to differences in educational attainment, with women typically spending fewer years in formal education.

But that can no longer be true of many developed countries, where women are now better educated on average than men. Instead, Goldin’s work indicates that the gap in pay occurs with the birth of a first child, with women typically devoting more time to child care.

But darker forces are also at work. In one paper, Goldin and co-author Cecilia Rouse from Princeton University showed that the number of female members of the leading U.S. symphony orchestras rose sharply in the 1980s partly because of the adoption of “blind” auditions, where the candidate for an orchestra position auditioned behind a screen, concealing their gender or race from those doing the hiring.

In their paper, called “Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of ‘Blind Auditions’ on Female Musicians,” the authors found data across decades of hiring by symphonies both before and after the introduction of blind auditions to show that about a quarter of the increase in female members of orchestras over that time was due to blind auditions, suggesting previous bias.



MOST POPULAR

A record-breaking $11 million sale at The Centennial Collection has set a new benchmark for luxury apartment living in Bondi Junction.

As interest rates, inflation and market sentiment fluctuate, investors are being urged to focus on data, not panic.

Related Stories
Money
The Budget Wake-Up Call for Wealthy Australians
By Opinion, Anthony Hunt 22/06/2026
Money
WHY COMING HOME CAN BE MORE FINANCIALLY COMPLICATED THAN LEAVING
By Brett Evans, Opinion 15/06/2026
Money
Everything You Need to Know About the SpaceX Trading Debut
By CORRIE DRIEBUSCH 12/06/2026
The Budget Wake-Up Call for Wealthy Australians

The Federal Budget may have softened some of its proposed tax reforms, but it has exposed a bigger issue: too many families are relying on wealth structures that no longer reflect the realities of modern life.

By Opinion, Anthony Hunt
Mon, Jun 22, 2026 3 min

For many Australians, the 2026 Federal Budget initially felt like a direct challenge to the way wealth is created, held and transferred between generations.

The headlines were immediate: changes to capital gains tax, reforms to discretionary trusts, restrictions on negative gearing and increased scrutiny of investment structures. Unsurprisingly, affluent families, business owners and investors began asking the same question:

Is the way we hold our wealth still fit for purpose?

In recent days, the government has announced several significant amendments following industry consultation and public feedback, including exempting testamentary trusts from the proposed 30 per cent minimum tax and expanding capital gains tax concessions for small businesses.

The backdown is welcome. But it also highlights something much bigger.

This Budget has accelerated a conversation that many Australian families have been postponing for years.

The conversation is not really about tax. It is about wealth stewardship.

For decades, Australians have built wealth through businesses, property, investments and careful long-term planning. Yet many families have not revisited the legal structures surrounding those assets in years, sometimes decades.

We often see clients who have spent years building significant wealth, only to discover their legal arrangements no longer reflect their current circumstances.

Their children are now adults. They may own multiple properties.

They may have sold a business, entered a second marriage, become grandparents or accumulated digital assets that did not exist when their original estate plans were prepared.

The trust that distributes income may need to be reconsidered. The bucket company may no longer be so attractive.

The Budget has simply exposed a reality that already existed: wealth structures cannot remain static while life continues to evolve.

Importantly, trusts themselves are not the issue.

Trusts are legitimate planning tools that provide flexibility, protection and continuity. When used appropriately, they allow families to adapt to changing circumstances over time.

And neither is tax the issue, really. Getting the fundamentals right is more important for long-term, sustainable wealth than a few favourable tax treatments around the edges.

Anthony Hunt

The real issue is complacency.

Too often, families create structures and assume the job is done. It isn’t.

Estate planning is no longer a document you sign once and file away in a drawer. It is an ongoing process that should evolve alongside your life.

We are also seeing a broader shift in how Australians define wealth itself. It is no longer just the family home and an investment portfolio.

Modern wealth includes businesses, digital assets, cryptocurrency, intellectual property, frequent flyer points and increasingly complex family arrangements.

At the same time, Australians are living longer than ever before, meaning wealth may need to support multiple generations simultaneously. This creates new responsibilities and new risks.

How do you help your children enter the property market without exposing family wealth to relationship breakdowns?

How do you structure wealth so that it remains a source of opportunity rather than future conflict?

These are the questions families should be asking now.

The recent debate surrounding testamentary trusts also serves as an important reminder that policy decisions can have unintended consequences for vulnerable Australians. It is encouraging that the government has listened to feedback and clarified its position.

But the lesson remains: the wealth landscape is changing.

Increasingly, governments, regulators and tax authorities are paying closer attention to how wealth is held and transferred. That means families cannot afford to adopt a “set-and-forget” approach to their structures.

The families who will be best placed for the future are not necessarily those with the greatest wealth.

They are the families with the greatest clarity. Clarity around ownership, succession and governance. And clarity around how wealth will transition from one generation to the next.

Ultimately, preserving wealth is not about avoiding change.

It is about preparing for it.

Because the greatest risk is not change itself.

It is losing the ability to respond to it.

Anthony Hunt is Co-Founder of Wealth Lawyers and former COO of Westpac Private Bank. He advises business owners, investors and affluent Australian families on wealth protection, succession planning and intergenerational wealth transfer

MOST POPULAR

As the season turns, Handpicked Wines’ latest Pinot Noir and Chardonnay releases reveal how subtle shifts in place shape what ends up in the glass.

Following the successful launch of its Palais Collection, MAISON de SABRÉ has unveiled a new modular handbag system offering more than 720 styling combinations.

Related Stories
Prestige
Luxury apartment ‘rightsizing’ boom reshapes prestige property market
By Jeni O'Dowd 10/03/2026
Lifestyle
REAL ESTATE POWER COUPLE’S GREATEST DEAL ARRIVES FOR VALENTINE’S DAY
By Jeni O'Dowd 13/02/2026
Motors
BMW LAUNCHES NEUE KLASSE WITH GLOBAL DEBUT OF ELECTRIC iX3
By Jeni O'Dowd 08/09/2025
0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop