Gendered Labor Market (dis)advantages in Nordic Welfare States : Introduction to the Theme of the Special Issue

This is a sel -a chi ed e sion o an o iginal a icle. This e sion may di e om he o iginal in pagina ion and ypog aphic de ails. Au ho (s): Ti le: Yea : Ve sion: Copy igh : Righ s: Righ s u l: Please ci e he o iginal e sion: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Gende ed Labo Ma ke (dis)ad an ages in No dic Wel a e S a es : In oduc ion o he Theme o he Special Issue © 2021 Au ho s and Jou nal Published e sion Mus osmäki, A mi; Reisel, Liza; Sih o, Tiina; Teigen, Ma i Mus osmäki, A., Reisel, L., Sih o, T., & Teigen, M. (2021). Gende ed Labo Ma ke (dis)ad an ages in No dic Wel a e S a es : In oduc ion o he Theme o he Special Issue. No dic Jou nal o Wo king Li e S udies, 11(S7), 1-9. h ps://doi.o g/10.18291/njwls.132537 2021 1 No dic jou nal o wo king li e s udies Volume 11 ❚ Numbe S7 ❚ No embe 2021 1 You can ind his ex and i s DOI a h ps:// idssk i .dk/njwls/index. 2,3 Co esponding au ho s: [email p o ec ed]; [email p o ec ed]. Gende ed Labo Ma ke (dis)ad an ages in No dic Wel a e S a es. In oduc ion o he Theme o he Special Issue1 ❚ A mi Mus osmäki2 Uni e si y o Jy äskylä, Finland ❚ Liza Reisel Ins i u e o Social Resea ch, Oslo, No way ❚ Tiina Sih o Uni e si y o Jy äskylä, Finland ❚ Ma i Teigen3 Ins i u e o Social Resea ch, Oslo, No way Gende equali y has been named as one o he no ma i e ounda ions o No dic wel- a e s a es. This is e lec ed in how, yea a e yea , No dic s a es ank among he mos gende egali a ian coun ies in he wo ld (see, e.g., Wo ld Economic Fo um 2020). In No dic coun ies, he s a e has been, and con inues o be, a cen al ac o in shaping women’s ci izenship, labo ma ke oppo uni ies, and ca ing oles. Especially publicly unded wel a e se ices and policies ha acili a e he econcilia ion o wo k and ca e ha e played a majo pa in ad ancing women’s labo ma ke pa icipa ion (see, e.g., Be gquis e al. 1999; Bo cho s & Siim 2002; Ellingsæ e & Lei a 2006; Siim & S ol z 2015). The ins i u ional amewo k o No dic wel a e s a e policies has been cen al o wha has been called he ‘social democ a ic public se ice ou e’ (Walby 2004). One o he impo an building blocks o gende equali y has been he aim o making policies in No dic coun ies ‘women- iendly’. Mo e han 30 yea s ago, Helga He nes (1987) iden i ied he No dic coun ies as ‘po en ially women- iendly socie ies’. She cha - ac e ized women- iendly socie ies as hose ha ‘would no o ce ha de choices on women han on men’ (ibid., 15), pa icula ly in ela ion o wo k and ca e. He nes also en isaged ha woman- iendliness should be achie ed wi hou inc easing o he o ms o inequali y, such as class o e hnici y-based inequali ies among di e en g oups o women. Howe e , achie ing gende equali y in wo king li e and he so o women- iendliness ha He nes en isaged a he socie al le el has in many ways also p o ed o be challenging, as he ies be ween he s a e and gende equali y goals a e mo e complex han wha hey migh seem a i s glance. Gende dispa i ies ha e p o en pe sis en also wi hin he No dic con ex . When we issued a call o his special issue, we we e in e - es ed in a ious o ms o gende ed labo ma ke (dis)ad an age in No dic coun ies. Fu he mo e, we asked how gende seg ega ion, wel a e s a e policies, labo ma ke 2 Gende ed Labo Ma ke (dis)ad an ages in No dic Wel a e S a es A mi Mus osmäki e al. policies, and a ious labo ma ke ac o s in e ac o p oduce, main ain, challenge, o change gende equali y in he labo ma ke in he No dic coun ies and beyond. The i e a icles p esen ed in his special issue add ess he issue o gende ed labo ma ke (dis)ad an ages in No dic coun ies om se e al an age poin s, ocusing on bo h on ‘ adi ional’ ques ions, such as co po a e powe and sus ainable employmen , and ‘eme ging’ ques ions such as in e sec ionali y, gende cul u e, and aes he ic wo k. No dic gende equali y ad ancemen s and he p e ailing challenges1 In he No dic coun ies, women’s labo ma ke pa icipa ion inc eased apidly om he 1960s (Cha e z & Hagen 1996; Lei a 2002). The o e all pic u e e eals ela i e s abili y and small c oss-coun y a ia ions. Howe e , No way lagged somewha behind Sweden and Denma k in women’s labo ma ke pa icipa ion, bu h oughou he 1980s, No way made up he dis ance, as he employmen ac i i y o mo h- e s o young child en inc eased sha ply. In con as , he 1950s and 1960s ha e been called he e a o he homemake (Melby 2008). Howe e , in Finland, women’s occupa ional ac i i y was highe in he i s decades a e he second wo ld-wa han in he es o he No dic egion, p obably caused by po e y and low male wages (Åma k 2006). Despi e some di e ences, gende equali y in he labo ma ke has p og essed well in he en i e No dic egion. Women’s labo ma ke pa icipa ion is high in all he No dic coun ies – and in educa ional a ainmen , women ha e su passed men. S ill, ela i ely la ge imbalances pe sis . Pa - ime wo k is one o he imbalances ha sepa- a e women and men in he No dic labo ma ke s. Pa - ime wo k is he leas com- mon in Finland and he mos common in No way and Iceland. Ye , pa - ime wo k has in ecen yea s been declining among mo he s o small child en, which is p ob- ably due o high co e age o child en in day-ca e, pa icula ly p e-school child en (3–5 yea s). Day-ca e co e age is he highes in No way and he lowes in Finland (see Table 1). Table 1 Labo ma ke pa icipa ion, educa ion le el, and day ca e use % women employed % women in pa - ime employmen (age 15–64) % g adua ed women a e ia y le el (age 15–74) % Child en in dayca e (0–2 yea s)* % Child en in dayca e (3–5 yea s)* Denma k 71.2 32.9 56.3 54.6 88.6 Finland 70.7 19.8 59.2 37.0 87.9 Iceland 73.5 34.9 65.9 58.2 96.8 No way 72.5 36.1 58.2 59.2 97.3 Sweden 73.5 31.7 62.2 50.6 95.8 Sou ce: No dic S a is ics da abase. *Denma k, Finland: 2019; Iceland: 2018; No way: 2020; Sweden: 2017. No dic jou nal o wo king li e s udies Volume 11 ❚ Numbe S7 ❚ No embe 2021 3 Mo eo e , despi e a slow decline in ecen yea s, he No dic labo ma ke s s ill ha e subs an ial le els o gende seg ega ion. The pa e n is ela i ely simila o he i e No dic coun ies. Denma k has he highes sha e o men in emale-domina ed indus ies and Finland he lowes . No way s ands ou wi h he lowes sha e o women in male- domina ed indus ies. The gende gap in hou ly wages pe sis s, as women on a e age ea n be ween 80% and 90% o wha men ea n pe hou . We ind he la ges pay-gap in Finland and he smalles in Sweden. Fu he mo e, male-dominance is s ubbo n on he op o business hie a chies in all he No dic coun ies, wi h Iceland wi h he clea ly poo es esul s. The si ua ion on co po a e boa ds is mo e balanced, mos likely ollow- ing he in oduc ion o gende quo as o co po a e boa ds in No way and Iceland, and changes in ecommenda ions in Sweden and Denma k (see Table 2). Table 2 Labo ma ke seg ega ion, gende wage gap, and co po a e powe % men in emale- domina ed indus iesa % women in male- domina ed indus iesa Gende pay gapb Gende balance % women CEO Gende balance % women boa d membe s Denma k 26.8 22.9 14.0 12 34 Finland 21.2 22.7 16.6 6 35 Iceland 24.3 22.2 13.8 0 43 No way 24.8 18.7 13.2 18 40 Sweden 26.0 21.3 11.8 10 38 Sou ce: No dic S a is ics da abase. a Male-domina ed indus ies: (2020) Ag icul u e, o es y and ishing, mining and qua ying, manu ac u ing, elec ici y, gas, s eam and ai condi ioning supply, wa e supply, sewe age, was e managemen and emedia ion ac i i ies, Cons uc ion, T anspo a ion and s o age, in o ma ion and communica ion. Female-domina ed indus ies: Educa ion, human heal h and social wo k ac i i ies, o he se ice ac i i ies. Ac i i ies o households as employe s, undi e en ia ed goods, and se ices- p oducing ac i i ies o households o own use. bBased on o al indus y, cons uc ion, and se ices (excep public adminis a ion, de ense, and compulso y social secu i y). A No dic wel a e s a e pa adox? C i icism has been di ec ed a how No dic coun ies and hei women- iendliness has been depic ed in o e ly posi i e e ms (see also Bo cho s & Siim 2002; Lis e 2009; Koskinen Sandbe g 2018; Mandel & Semyono 2006) In ac , he indexes placing he No dic coun ies as compa a i ely high achie e s o gende equali y, a e based on e y c ude measu es (Ki kebø e al. 2021). I has also been ques ioned whe he policies ha aim o women- iendliness imp o e he ca ee chances o women in he labo ma ke , o whe he hey ul ima ely ha e he opposi e e ec on women hemsel es, leading o he ‘wel a e s a e pa adox’ (Mandel & Semyono 2006). Ins i u ional heo ies (e.g., Es é ez-Abe 2005) ha e a gued ha women in No dic labo ma ke s ace mo e di - icul ies in hei ca ee p og ession when compa ed o hei emale coun e pa s in less egula ed labo ma ke s and less gene ous wel a e s a es. This line o esea ch has highligh ed ha he sha e o women in manage ial posi- ions is ela i ely low in he No dic coun ies, e en in he public sec o (Abendo h e al. 4 Gende ed Labo Ma ke (dis)ad an ages in No dic Wel a e S a es A mi Mus osmäki e al. 2013; Dämm ich & Bloss eld 2016; E e sson e al. 2009; Mandel & Semyono 2006; Yaish & S ie 2009). I has been a gued ha in pa , glass ceilings and glass doo s pe sis due o long amily lea es, s ong employmen p o ec ion. and gende -seg ega ed labo ma ke s (Da a Gup a e al. 2008; Es é ez-Abe 2005). Howe e , hese indings a e also dispu ed. A di e en s and o esea ch sugges s ha gende seg ega ion is declining in he No dic coun ies, and ha he ype o amily lea e sys ems ha a e dominan in he No dic coun ies ha e ei he posi i e o limi ed e ec s on ca ee choices, equal ea men and pay (Be io & Ve ashchagina 2012; Byg en & Gähle 2021; G önlund & Magnusson 2016; Hook & Li 2020). Ano he s and o c i icism has also been di ec ed o how ea ing he No dic coun ies as a monoli h gloss o e he in a-No dic di e ences in ela ion o gende (in)equali y in he labo ma ke (e.g., Be gquis e al. 1999; G önlund e al. 2017). In ac , he de elopmen s in he No dic coun ies do no always ollow simila pa hways. Howe e , di e ences a e la ge in he in oduc ion o policies o p omo e gende equal- i y han in gende equal p ac ices (Teigen & Skjeie 2017). Fu he mo e, no s a e in i sel is a homogenous ac o ha always aims owa ds women- iendliness. Va ious kinds o de elopmen s ake place simul aneously, which some imes lead o de elopmen o mo e women- iendly policies and some imes no (Kan ola 2004). The same could be a gued o he labo ma ke as well: he labo ma ke in i sel is no a uni o m en i y, bu a he a plu ali y o a enas whe e a ious kinds o de elopmen s ega ding gende (in)equali y a e cons an ly aking place and new o ms o gende ed (dis)ad an age eme ge. Finally, women- iendliness has also been c i icized o assuming a collec i ely sha ed in e es among women ha p esumes a homogenous and p edic able li e pa e n o all women: ha all women aim o ( ull- ime) paid wo k, and ha all women will e en ually become mo he s. Consequen ly, women- iendliness has been c i icized o cons uc ing ‘women’ as a uni o m social ca ego y wi hin which all indi iduals s i e om simila social posi ions owa ds simila goals. Ul ima ely, he e is he dange ha he concep o women- iendliness boils down exclusi ely o whi e middle-class he e o- sexual women wi h (young) child en as i s only poli ical subjec , hus o ge ing in e sec- ionali y (Bo cho s & Siim 2002; Bo cho s e al. 2012; Kan ola 2004). In e sec ionali y and aes he ic labo as eme ging ques ions In ecen yea s, he in e sec ion be ween he inequali ies o he gende ed labo ma - ke and mig a ion- ela ed inequali ies ha e gained inc easing in e es . On a e age in he No dic coun ies, whe e na i e women ha e high employmen a es, employmen di ides be ween na i e and o eign-bo n popula ions a e wide. In e ms o employmen a es, he di e ence be ween na i e and o eign-bo n women is as much as 15 pe - cen age poin s in Sweden, Denma k, and Finland (OECD/Eu opean Union 2019). On he one hand, he lowe emale labo ma ke pa icipa ion among o eign-bo n women may be explained by employe disc imina ion and employe s’ biased pe cep ions abou o eign bo n applican s’ quali ica ions and sui abili y. On he o he hand, explana ions a e also ela ed o he mig an s hemsel es, such as mo e adi ional amily models in some immig an communi ies, o lack o ele an expe ience, quali ica ions, o ne - wo ks (Ka li & Nadim 2009; La sen e al. 2018; Mid bøen 2016; Nadim & Fjell 2019.) Al hough labo ma ke pa icipa ion is ma kedly lowe among o eign-bo n women No dic jou nal o wo king li e s udies Volume 11 ❚ Numbe S7 ❚ No embe 2021 5 han na i e o igin women, he e a e clea indica ions ha labo ma ke pa icipa ion is highe and gende di e ences smalle among descendan s o immig an s, han among he o eign-bo n (Øs by & Aalandslid 2020, p. 40). Heidi Leh o aa a and Ma ju Jy kinen’s a icle in his special issue, abou skilled mig an women’s job sea ch expe iences, add esses his ypical blind spo o he ‘women- iendliness’ na a i e. The a icle desc ibes how highly skilled mig an women a i e in Finland and engage in in ensi e job sea ch ac i i y in an e o o access he labo ma ke . The a icle in es iga es mig an women’s expe iences o inequali ies in access o he labo ma ke , and pa icula ly he emo ional bu den o being epea edly igno ed o ejec ed in job sea ch p ocesses, despi e ha ing highly ele an quali ica ions. The au ho s iden i y wha hey call a pa adoxical ela ionship be ween expec a ions and expe iences, whe e highly skilled women mig a e o a coun y well known o i s high emale labo o ce pa icipa ion only o ind ha he labo ma ke is all bu closed o women whose c eden ials and wo k expe ience a e no ecognized as alid, due o hei o eign o igin. In addi ion o in e sec ionali y, ano he ‘eme ging’ heme in his special issue is he ole o appea ance in wo king li e, and how in di e en ields o wo k, appea ance, and p esen a ion o he sel is, o an inc easing ex en , u ned in o a commodi y. In he No dic coun ies, he unde lying expec a ion ega ding app op ia e looks and appea - ance is ha o seemingly e o less looking ‘na u alness’. Howe e , as poin ed ou by Åbe g (2020), he e hos o na u alness migh o e ide how physical appea ance is no - ma i ely sanc ioned in he No dic con ex as well: he equi emen s o ‘na u alness’ a e a ainable pa icula ly o hose, who a e al eady p i ileged in e ms o economic, social, and cul u al capi al. Two a icles o his special issue (Kou i and Kukkonen & Sa pila) ocus on aes- he ic wo k, albei om wo e y di e en poin s o iew. Su i Kou i’s a icle analyzes he emo ional and aes he ic labo o Finnish mili a y o ice s. Acco ding o he analysis, he mili a y ideals ega ding emo ional and aes he ic labo a e going h ough changes, as he new ideal soldie is expec ed o pe o m bodily and emo ional displays, which a e ypically conside ed eminine and a e usually pe o med by women in se ice wo k. Howe e , hese ‘ eminine’ displays a e only done up o a ce ain limi and he ‘ igh kind o mili a y look’ ha he mili a y o ice s a e expec ed o display is s ill loaded wi h ‘ adi ional’ masculine ideals and alua ions. The a icle by Iida Kukkonen and Ou i Sa pila explo es appea ance- ela ed pe ks and penal ies in Finnish labo ma ke . Acco ding o hei analysis, men expe ience mo e appea ance- ela ed pe ks han women. Howe e , women a e s ill expec ed o wo k on hei appea ances mo e, e en hough hei possibili ies o gaining bene i om hei appea ances in wo king li e a e es ic ed. Cul u al and s uc u al limi a ions o women- iendliness Among he mos pe sis en gende inequali ies in he No dic wel a e s a es a e labo ma ke inequali ies, such as pe asi e gende seg ega ion ac oss indus ies and occupa- ions, he gende pay gap, and unde ep esen a ion o women in highe manage ial and co po a e posi ions. These challenges ha e p o en su p isingly di icul o ackle despi e being a ge ed wi h a ious gende equali y policies, measu es, and p og ams. They a e 6 Gende ed Labo Ma ke (dis)ad an ages in No dic Wel a e S a es A mi Mus osmäki e al. also in e ela ed; seg ega ion as well as he gende pay gap a e pa ly due o women wo king in ca e, heal h, and educa ion, o en concen a ed in pa s o he public sec o whe e wage inc eases and possibili ies o ca ee p og ession a e limi ed. Women also ha e adi ionally been pa o he ‘ lexible’ wo k o ce, shoulde ing he b un o unpaid ca e wo k, e en when wo king ull- ime o accommoda ing hei wo king hou s, wo k- ing pa - ime, and o en in p eca ious con ac s. Academic esea ch has o long endea o ed o unde s and he mechanisms by which women’s ca ee p og ession emain limi ed in he p i a e sec o , especially op manage ial posi ions and on co po a e boa ds. Ins i u ional heo ies highligh he ole o employe disc imina ion: employe s would be eluc an o ec ui and in es in ca ee s o women as hey a e expec ed o use hei long amily lea es o wi hd aw o pa - ime jobs (Es é ez-Abe 2005). O he heo ies ha e unde lined cul u al ac o s (e.g., P au-E inge 2002, 2012) o he indi idual women’s p e e ences and choices ha migh lead women o ‘choose home o wo k’ (Hakim 2000). I is likely ha cul u al ac o s, such as pa en hood ideals, a ec women’s ca ee s and choices. Fo example, while paid p i a e childca e in he home is widely a ailable and accep ed in he US (S one & Lo ejoy 2019), i is seen as iola ing he ideal o in ol ed pa en hood among eli e p o- essionals in No way (Hal ynjo & Lyng 2009). The compa a i e s udy by Sig ona Hal ynjo and Ma y Blai -Loy on unde ep esen- a ion o women in co po a e boa ds in No way and in he USA con ibu es o his dis- cussion by looking in o explana ions om heo ies on in-g oup a o i ism, emphasizing cogni i e p ocesses leading op-le el decision make s o a o people o he same social and demog aphic g oup as hemsel es o op-le el posi ions. Based on in o ma ion om 457 la ge companies in No way and he USA, hey ind weak empi ical suppo o in-g oup a o i ism in he No wegian con ex . The au ho s discuss al e na i e explana- ions, emphasizing socie al and o ganiza ional s uc u es a o ing men’s ca ee s, hus limi ing he supply o women wi h senio ope a ional expe ience. Ida D ange and Mia Vabø’s a icle abou sus ainable employmen in No dic elde - ca e add esses an issue ha is a ely a he o e on o discussions abou he No dic wel a e s a es, pa - ime wo k and emale labo ma ke pa icipa ion. Based on a su ey conduc ed in Denma k, Finland, No way, and Sweden, hey in es iga e how pa - ime shi wo k, which so o en is highligh ed as a ‘women iendly’ o m o labo o ce pa - icipa ion, can lead o wo k-li e con lic s and inancial dis ess. The a icle u he mo e discusses No dic a ia ion in e ms o wo king hou s and shi wo k s uc u es ac oss he ou coun ies, concluding ha he Danish sys em o ixed shi s seem o be he leas bu densome o he ou ela i ely di e en coun y models. Unde s anding emaining inequali ies The e a e impo an di e ences ac oss No dic coun ies, bo h in he ac ual de elop- men o gende equali y, and in how gende equali y and gende ela ions a e discussed and p oblema ized in public. Signi ican changes in women’s empowe men , on he labo ma ke and in poli ics, ook place om he 1960s and 1970s onwa ds, wi h g ea ami ica ions socially and economically. Despi e his, he pace o gende equal- i y de elopmen has slowed down in ecen yea s. The une en de elopmen o gende equali y and he ac ha some ea u es o skewed gende ela ions ha e p o ed mo e No dic jou nal o wo king li e s udies Volume 11 ❚ Numbe S7 ❚ No embe 2021 7 di icul o change han o he s ha e been cen al o his issue o he No dic Jou nal o Wo king Li e S udies. The i e a icles in his special issue demons a e how he emaining inequali ies pa ly ela e o he s uc u es o he wel a e s a e assumed as women- iendly. The gen- de ed di ision o labo s ill o ces ha de choices on women han on men in he No dic egion. The econcilia ion o wo k and amily, he gende pay-gap, male-dominance in leade ship posi ions, di ision o paid and unpaid wo k, he in luence o s e eo ypes, gen- de ed ideals, and social no ms a e no ully elie ed by wel a e s a e se ices and labo ma ke egula ion. The a icles di ec ou a en ion o u he esea ch and discuss how achie ing gende equali y ela es o cul u al changes in socie y, in o ganiza ions, and in p i a e li es ha migh be coun e -p oduc i e. S uc u al change, such as change in policy, does no necessa ily esul in cul u al change, and cul u al and s uc u al change can also de elop in di e gen ways and a di - e en speeds. To be e unde s and he con empo a y challenges in he p og ess owa d gende equali y in he No dic egion, he e is a need o mo e esea ch ha examines and unde s ands cul u e and s uc u e in con ex . Re e ences Abend o h, A.-K., Maas, I. & an de Lippe, T. (2013). Human Capi al and he Gende Gap in Au ho i y in Eu opean Coun ies, Eu opean Sociological Re iew 29(2): 261–273, doi: h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/es /jc 059. Be gq is , Ch is ina e al. (1999). Equal Democ acies: Gende and Poli ics in he No dic Coun ies, Oslo: Scandina ian Uni e si y P ess. Be io, F. & Ve ashchagina, A. (2009). F on ie s in he economics o gende , London: Rou ledge. Bo cho s , A., F eiden all, L., Kan ola, J., Reisel, L., & Teigen, M. (2012). Ins i u ionalizing in e sec ionali y in he No dic Coun ies? An i-Disc imina ion and Equali y in Denma k, Finland, No way and Sweden. In: K izsan, A., Skjeie, H. & Squi es, J. (eds.), Ins i u ion- alizing In e sec ionali y? The Changing Na u e o Eu opean Equali y Regimes, Basing- s oke: Palg a e Macmillan, 59–88. Byg en, M. & Gähle , M. (2021). A e Women Disc imina ed agains in coun ies wi h high Ex ensi e Family Policies? A Piece o he ‘Wel a e S a e Pa adox’ Puzzle om Sweden. Social Poli ics: In e na ional S udies in Gende , S a e & Socie y, online i s jxab010, doi: h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/sp/jxab010. Cha e z, J. S. & Hagen, J. (1996). The gende di ision o labou and amily change in indus- ial socie ies, Jou nal o Compa a i e Family S udies 27: 187–219. Da a Gup a, N., Smi h, N. & Ve ne , M. (2008). Pe spec i e a icle: The Impac o No dic coun ies’ amily iendly policies on employmen , wages and child en, Re iew o Eco- nomics o he Household 6(65): 65–89. Dämm ich, J., & Bloss eld, H. P. (2017). Women’s disad an age in holding supe iso y po- si ions. Va ia ions among Eu opean coun ies and he ole o ho izon al gende seg ega- ion. Ac a Sociologica 60(3): 262–282. doi: h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0001699316675022. Elllingsæ e , A. L. & Lei a, A. (2006). Poli icising Pa en hood in Scandina ia: Gende Rela- ions in Wel a e S a es, B is ol: The Policy P ess. Es é ez-Abe, M. (2005). Gende Bias in Skills and Social Policies: The Va ie ies o Capi alism Pe spec i e on Sex Seg ega ion, Social Poli ics: In e na ional S udies in Gende , S a e & Socie y 12(2): 180–215. 8 Gende ed Labo Ma ke (dis)ad an ages in No dic Wel a e S a es A mi Mus osmäki e al. E e sson, M., England, P., Mooi-Reci, I. (2009). Is gende inequali y g ea e a lowe o highe educa ional le els? Common pa e ns in he Ne he lands, Sweden and he Uni ed S a es, Social Poli ics: In e na ional S udies in Gende , S a e & Socie y 16(2): 210–210. G önlund, A. & Magnusson, C. (2016). Family- iendly policies and women’s wages – is he e a ade-o ?: Skill in es men s, occupa ional seg ega ion and he gende pay gap in Ge many, Sweden and he UK, Eu opean Socie ies 18(1): 91–113. G önlund, A., Halldén, K. & Magnusson, C. (2017). A Scandina ian Success S o y? Women’s labou Ma ke Ou comes in Denma k, Finland, No way and Sweden, Ac a Sociologica 60(2): 97–119. Hakim, C. (2000). Wo k-Li es yle Choices in he 21s Cen u y: P e e ence Theo y, Ox o d Uni e si y P ess, Ox o d. Hal ynjo, S. & Lyng, S. T. (2009). P e e ences, Cons ain s and Schemas o De o ion? Explo - ing No wegian Mo he ’s Wi hd awal om High-Commi men Ca ee s, B i ish Jou nal o Sociology 60(2): 321–343. He nes, H. M. (1987). Wel a e s a e and woman powe : Essays in s a e eminism. Oslo: Scandina ian Uni e si y P ess. Hook, J. L., & Li, M. (2020). Gende ed adeo s. In The Palg a e Handbook o Family Policy, 249–266, Palg a e Macmillan, Cham. Kan ola, J. (2004). Doing eminis discou se analysis: Domes ic iolence in he women- iendly wel a e s a e o Finland, Eu opean Poli ical Science 3(2): 85–96. Ka li, H. C. & Nadim, M. (2009). Familiep aksis og likes illing i inn and ede amilie , Oslo: Fa o. h ps://www. a o.no/media/com_ne sukii/20129.pd . Ki kebø, T. L., Lang o d, M. & By kje lo , H. (2021). C ea ing gende Excep ionalism: The Role o Global Indexes. In: La sen, E., Moss, S.M, & Skjelsbæk, I. (eds.). Gende Equali y and Na ion B anding in he No dic Region. Rou ledge. 191–206. h p://www. aylo ancis. com/books/e/9781003017134. Koskinen Sandbe g, P. (2018). The co po a is egime, wel a e s a e employmen , and gende pay inequi y, NORA: No dic Jou nal o Feminis and Gende Resea ch 26(1): 36–52. La sen, E. N., Rogne, A. F. & Bi kelund, G. E. (2018). Pe ec o he Job? O e quali ica ion o Immig an s and hei Descendan s in he No wegian Labo Ma ke . Social Inclusion. ISSN 2183–2803. 6(3): 78–103. Lei a, A. (2002). Wo king Pa en s and he Wel a e S a e: Family Change and Policy Re o m in Scandina ia, Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. Lis e , Ru h (2009). A No dic Ni ana? Gende , ci izenship, and social jus ice in he No dic Wel a e s a es, Social Poli ics 16(2): 242–278. Mandel, H. & Semyono , M. (2006). A Wel a e S a e Pa adox: S a e In e en ions and Women’s Employmen Oppo uni ies in 22 Coun ies, Ame ican Jou nal o Sociology 111(6): 1910–1949. Melby, K., Ra n, A.-B., We e be g, C. C. (2008). Gende equali y and wel a e poli ics in Scandina ia. The limi s o poli ical ambi ion? B is ol: Policy P ess. Mid bøen, A. H. (2016). Disc imina ion o he Second Gene a ion: E idence om a Field Ex- pe imen in No way, Jou nal o In e na ional Mig a ion and In eg a ion 17(1): 253–272. Nadim, M. & Fjell, L. K. (2019). Kjønn, a beid og inn and ing. CORE- epo : h ps://www. sam unns o skning.no/co e/publikasjone /co e-indika o -s a us/kjonn-a beid-og-inn an- d ing/kjonn-a beid-og-inn and ing.pd . OECD/Eu opean Union (2019). Gende di e ences in immig an in eg a ion. Indica o s o Immig an In eg a ion, OECD Publishing, Pa is/Eu opean Union, B ussels. doi: h ps:// doi.o g/10.1787/9789264307216-10-en.