Gender equality trade-offs re-examined: evidence from Swiss cantons

Gasser, Martin; Liechti, Lena

doi:10.1080/13668803.2014.1002753

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The rankings are obtained by specialized institutions, who first estimate levels of inequality and subsequently rank countries on one such measure or construct a composite index of such measures. Utilized for both policy-evaluation and policy-making purposes (for Sweden and Switzerland see [1,2], Bloomberg systematically ranks the US states for gender equality [3]), the rankings are used to shape the public debate, set policy objectives and deploy public funding. Indeed, the debate on gender equality is largely influenced by cross-country rankings, see, for example [4][5][6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methods for estimating the scope of unjustified inequality differ in their sensitivity to address institutional and structural deficiencies. In the case of gender wage gaps, adjusting adequately for individual characteristics requires prior assessment of several important deficiencies, primarily whether a given labor market is characterized by gendered selection into employment, gendered segmentation and whether these mechanisms differ along the distribution of wages. Given that countries are characterized by differentiated prevalence of these deficiencies, ranking countries on gender wage gaps is a challenging task. Whether a country is perceived as more equal than others depends on the interaction between the method of adjusting gender wage gap for individual characteristics and the prevalence of these deficiencies. We make the case that this interaction is empirically relevant by comparing the country rankings for the adjusted gender wage gap among 23 EU countries. In this relatively homogeneous group of countries, the interaction between method and underlying deficiencies leads to substantial variation in the extent of unjustified inequality. A country may change its place in the ranking by as much as ten positions–both towards greater equality and towards greater inequality. We also show that, if explored properly, this variability can yield valuable policy insights: changes in the ranking positions across methods inform on the policy priority of the labor market deficiencies across countries in relative terms.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast to these optimistic studies, highly influential recent research has problematized generous work-family reconciliation policies for triggering gender "tradeoffs" and "paradoxes" with adverse labor market consequences for women (Albrecht et al 2003;Bergmann 2009;Gasser and Liechti 2015;Lalive and Zweimueller 2009;Mandel andSemyonov 2005, 2006;Pettit and Hook 2009;Schoenberg and Ludsteck 2014). 1 According to these scholars, lengthy paid parental leaves, public childcare, and large welfare states and public sectors undermine women's and mothers' labor market outcomes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Work–family reconciliation policies and women’s and mothers’ labor market outcomes in rich democracies

Brady

Blome

Kmec

2019

Socio-Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prominent research has claimed that work–family reconciliation policies trigger ‘tradeoffs’ and ‘paradoxes’ in terms of gender equality with adverse labor market consequences for women. These claims have greatly influenced debates regarding social policy, work, family and gender inequality. Motivated by limitations of prior research, we analyze the relationship between the two most prominent work–family reconciliation policies (paid parental leave and public childcare coverage) and seven labor market outcomes (employment, full-time employment, earnings, full-time earnings, being a manager, being a lucrative manager and occupation percent female). We estimate multilevel models of individuals nested in a cross-section of 21 rich democracies near 2005, and two-way fixed effects models of individuals nested in a panel of 12 rich democracies over time. The vast majority of coefficients for work–family policies fail to reject the null hypothesis of no effects. The pattern of insignificance occurs regardless of which set of models or coefficients one compares. Moreover, there is as much evidence that significantly contradicts the ‘tradeoff hypothesis’ as is consistent with the hypothesis. Altogether, the analyses undermine claims that work–family reconciliation policies trigger trade-offs and paradoxes in terms of gender equality with adverse labor market consequences for women.

show abstract

Are Women Discriminated Against in Countries with Extensive Family Policies? A Piece of the “Welfare State Paradox” Puzzle from Sweden

Bygren

Gähler

2021

Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State &Amp; Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A common assumption in comparative family policy studies is that employers statistically discriminate against women in countries with dual-earner family policy models. The empirical evidence cited in support of this assumption has exclusively been observational data, which should not be relied on to identify employer discrimination. In contrast, we investigate whether employers discriminate against women in Sweden—frequently viewed as epitomizing the dual-earner family policy model—using field experiment data. We find no evidence supporting the notion that Swedish employers statistically discriminate against women.

show abstract

Gender equality trade-offs re-examined: evidence from Swiss cantons

Cited by 3 publications

References 47 publications

How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps

How rankings disguise gender inequality: A comparative analysis of cross-country gender equality rankings based on adjusted wage gaps

Work–family reconciliation policies and women’s and mothers’ labor market outcomes in rich democracies

Are Women Discriminated Against in Countries with Extensive Family Policies? A Piece of the “Welfare State Paradox” Puzzle from Sweden

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About