birgit pfau-effinger, university of hamburg
DESCRIPTION
Birgit Pfau-Effinger, University of Hamburg. Women‘s employment in the context of culture and work-family arrangements in a comparative perspective. Employment patterns in Germany, the Netherlands and Finland, 2003 (Source:OECD 2006; Luxembourg: Eurostat 2005). - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Women‘s employment in the context of culture and work-family arrangements in a comparative perspective
Birgit Pfau-Effinger, University of Hamburg
Employment patterns in Germany, the Netherlands and Finland, 2003 (Source:OECD 2006; Luxembourg: Eurostat 2005)
Germany Netherlands
Finland
Men‘s employment 1994 2005
74 7571 79
6169
Women‘s employment 1994 2005
55 5360 65
5967
part-time work of women (% of all employed women) 1994 2005
28,0 54,539,4 60,9
11,514,8
Part-time work of women with children (% of all employed women)
35,1 54,7 7,8
Structures of households with children 0-15 years old in Germany and Finland (Source:OECD 2006; European Social Survey 2005)
Germany Netherlands
Finland
Male full-time/female full-time 19,1 6,3 59,6
Male full-time/female long part-time (20-34 hours)
17,4 27,5 8,7
Male full-time/female short part-time (under 20 hours)
15,6 27,7 1,6
Male sole earner (including materinity/parental leave)
33,7 23,3 20,9
central question
How can cross-national differences in the behaviour of women between family and employment be explained?
common argument in comparative social policy research
Welfare state policies determine the behaviour of women between labour market and family (labour force participation, part-time work, informal family care).
Cross-national differences in the behaviour of women between work and family can therefore be explained by differences in the type of welfare state (for ex. Siim 2000; Lewis 1998)
challenging this argument
Many European welfare states have established generous rights for children to public childcare provision (like also Finland and Netherlands).
Take up rates however are very different. The real structures of supply of public childcare reflect a mixture of family policies and behaviour of families (take up rates).
The degree to which the welfare state provides public childcare among other things also reflects cultural attitudes in the population towards childcare.
Attitudes towards childcare and mother‘s employment (ISSP 2002)
A pre-school child is likely to suffer if his or her mother works (strongly agree/agree)
Women should stay at home when they have children under school age
Poland 55,0 56,5
West Germany 55.8 52,0
Spain 52.2 37,0
France 42.4 43,7
Netherlands 39.8 28,6
Great Britain 37.1 56,2
Finland 36,1 39,8
East Germany 32.7 14,8
Denmark 32.4 23,3
basic assumption concerning the explanation of women‘s behavior between family and employment
Cultural differences, besides institutional differences, contribute substantially to the explanation of cross-national differences in the behaviour of women between family and employment.
Cultural differences also interact with welfare state policies, even if there can be tensions and contradictions.
Women act in the context of cultural values and models towards the family, welfare state policies and other institutions, like labor markets.
Explanation of women‘s behavior in the context of the work-family arrangement
Women‘s behavior between family and employment
Social actors (collective/individual)
-- conflicts-Negotiation -behaviour
cultural system - welfare culture
- gender/family culture...,
Social system
Central Institutions
-welfare state -Family
--labour market t- market/economy
Supranational influences like globalisation, supranational policies, EU -Integration etc.
Social structures-social inequality -dividion of labour-Power relations
reproduction or change basis: ideas, interests
Interests
Ideas
culture
defined as constructions of sense to which people orient in their behaviour, it includes values and models, briefly: ideas (Neidhard 1992; Lepsius 1990; Archer 1995)
Defining ‚culture‘ and ‚family culture‘
family culture
the family culture comprises the basic ideas in a society which are related to the family, the gender division of labout and the work-family relationship
the family culture connects family and waged work in different ways in different societies (and in part also in different classes/regions/ethnic groups).
The central dimensions of the family culture include
values and models in relation to...
the division of labor within the family the adequate sphere for the upbringing of children
(family, or external childcare provision) the main sphere/s of work of women and men the
societal esteem for each of these sphere the degree of dependence/autonomy in the relationship
of spouses
the main family models of the 20th and 21rst Century in West Europe
the family economy model
the housewife model of the male breadwinner
family
the male breadwinner/female part-time carer
model
the dual breadwinner/outside care model
the dual breadwinner/dual carer model
main relevant elements of the work-family arrangement for the explanation of the differences
the dominant family model(s)
the welfare regime: policies relating to the relationship of the citizen towards the welfare state (Esping-Andersen 1990, 1999)
The interaction of family model and welfare regime
Conservative Welfare regime
Social Democratic Welfare regime
Liberal Welfare regime
Type 1: Strong esteem of family childcare in family model
West Germany
Norway Netherlands
U.K.
Type 2: Lower esteem of family childcare in dominant family model
East Germany France
Sweden Denmark Finland
The current differences in the dominant family model can to a substantial degree be explained by the degree to which the housewife model of the male breadwinner family was relevant in the earlier stage of development (1950s and 1960s).
The cultural differences which existed at that stage (1950s and 1960s) can particularly also be explained by the role of the urban bourgeoisie in the history of the respective society.
Histocial explanation why a specific family model is dominant
Family economy model Dual
breadwinner/external care provider
model
Housewife model of the male
breadwinnerMarriage
Male breadwinner/part-time
Care providerModel
Dual breadwinner/Dual carer model
Two different typical paths of family-work arrangements: the impact of history
Historical explanation model for the cultural differences in the 1950s/1960s
Germany (West)
Netherlands Finland
Housewife model of the male breadwinner family as dominant practice
1950s until beginning of 1970s
17th Century until the beginning of 1970s
Never
Housewife model of the male breadwinner family as dominant cultural model
Start of 20th Century until beginning of 1970s
17. Century until the beginning of 1970s
Never
Important explanatory factor
The importance of the urban bourgeoisie in transition to modern society
Social, political and culturally important role since later 19th Century
Cultural, social and political dominance since 17th Century
Cultural, social and political dominance of the class of farmers until (late) transition to industrial and service society (1960s, 1970s)
conclusion
Cross-national differences in women‘s behavior between family and employment
The relationship of culture, welfare state policies and individual behaviour can be conceptualised as a complex, multi level relationship which is embedded in the specific context of a society and can change in contradictory ways.
The introduction of culture can contribute to an increase in the explanatory power of concepts to explain cross-national differences in the behaviour of individuals between family and employment.
Cultural differences contribute substantially to the explanation of cross-national differences in the behaviour of women and men between family and work.
Thank you very much for your attention!