Gendered Relationship of Childbearing with Earnings Accumulated by Midlife in Two Nordic Welfare States

Nisén, Jessica; E landsson, Anni; Jalo aa a, Ma ika
A icle — Published Ve sion
Gende ed Rela ionship o Childbea ing wi h Ea nings
Accumula ed by Midli e in Two No dic Wel a e S a es
Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Sp inge Na u e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Nisén, Jessica; E landsson, Anni; Jalo aa a, Ma ika (2024) : Gende ed Rela ionship
o Childbea ing wi h Ea nings Accumula ed by Midli e in Two No dic Wel a e S a es, Jou nal
o Family and Economic Issues, ISSN 1573-3475, Sp inge US, New Yo k, NY, Vol. 46, Iss. 3, pp.
685-707,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10834-024-09986-4
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/330640
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Vol.:(0123456789)
Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10834-024-09986-4
ORIGINAL PAPER
Gende ed Rela ionship o Childbea ing wi hEa nings Accumula ed
byMidli e inTwo No dic Wel a e S a es
JessicaNisén1,2,3 · AnniE landsson1,4· Ma ikaJalo aa a1
Accep ed: 21 Augus 2024 / Published online: 17 Sep embe 2024
© The Au ho (s) 2024
Abs ac
The No dic wel a e s a es a e conside ed ad anced in e ms o gende equali y, bu e en in hese coun ies women s ill ake
longe amily lea e and ha e lowe ea nings han men. This s udy p o ides new insigh s by assessing he di e ences in accu-
mula ed midli e ea nings associa ed wi h childbea ing be ween women and men in Finland and Sweden. We pay pa icula
a en ion o he size o he gende gap in accumula ed ea nings ac oss g oups. We hypo hesize ha he gende gap will be
la ge among hose wi h a la ge numbe o child en, among hose wi h a lowe le el o educa ion, and o e all in Finland.
The s udy is based on comple e popula ion egis e da a, wi h highly accu a e measu es o ea nings o e decades. Ou esul s
show ha by he age o 44, women bo n in 1974–1975 in Finland and Sweden had ea ned on a e age 32% and 29% less
han men, espec i ely. Childbea ing s ongly modi ies he gende gap, especially in Finland, and he highly educa ed ha e
mode a ely smalle gaps in bo h coun ies. Ou esul s show ha , e en he No dic wel a e s a es, despi e hei s ong policy
emphasis on gende equali y and hei success in achie ing high le els o emale labo o ce pa icipa ion, a e a om clos-
ing he gende gap in ea nings accumula ed o e he i s hal o he li e cou se. Ou esul s also sugges ha go e nmen s
seeking o achie e gende equali y should be cau ious abou p o iding long amily- ela ed lea e wi h la - a e compensa ion.
Keywo ds Ea nings· Fe ili y· Gende inequali y· Labo ma ke · Wel a e s a e· No dic coun ies
In oduc ion
The No dic coun ies end o be seen as o e unne s in
p omo ing gende equali y. This iew is suppo ed by he
compa a i ely high labo o ce pa icipa ion a es o women
and he modes gende gaps in employmen a es in hese
coun ies (Fe agina, 2019; OECD, 2019). Mo eo e , he
mo he hood penal ies in e ms o wages and ea nings end o
be smalle in he No dics han in some o he coun ies (Cuk-
owska-To zewska & Ma ysiak, 2020; Kle en e al., 2019a,
2019b). Howe e , he e is e idence ha he penal ies a e
la ge in Finland han in Sweden (Budig e al., 2016). Bo h
Finland and Sweden a e, like o he No dic coun ies, o en
classi ied as social-democ a ic wel a e s a es (Gos a Esping-
Ande sen, 1990; Powell e al., 2020). In pa icula , he poli i-
cal aims o suppo ing he combina ion o employmen and
childbea ing, as well as p omo ing gende and social equal-
i y, a e s ong cha ac e is ics o he No dic wel a e egime
(Ellingsæ e e al., 2006; Gos a Esping-Ande sen, 2009). In
suppo o hese aims, bene i s a e ypically p o ided uni e -
sally and indi iduals a he han couples a e subjec o axa-
ion in he No dic coun ies. In e ms o amily policy, he
No dic coun ies a e known o he p o ision o comp ehen-
si e policies. These include job-p o ec ed and income-com-
pensa ed amily- ela ed lea es, uni e sal access o a o d-
able and publicly subsidized childca e o enable mo he s and
a he s o e u n o ull- ime wo k a e childbi h, as well
as child- ela ed income suppo (Daly & Fe agina, 2018).
Consequen ly, he labo o ce pa icipa ion le els o women
closely esemble hose o men and dual-ea ne amilies a e
e y common in hese coun ies.
Despi e hese p og essi e ea u es o he No dic coun-
ies, he e con inues o be signi ican gende inequali y in
* Jessica Nisén
[email p o ec ed]
1 INVEST Resea ch Flagship Cen e, Uni e si y o Tu ku,
Publicum, Assis en inka u 7, Tu ku20014, Finland
2 Max Planck Ins i u e o Demog aphic Resea ch, Ros ock,
Ge many
3 Helsinki Ins i u e o Demog aphy andPopula ion Heal h,
Uni e si y o Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
4 Demog aphy Uni , Depa men o Sociology, S ockholm
Uni e si y, S ockholm, Sweden
686 Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
labo ma ke ou comes such as wages, ea nings, wo king
hou s, and ep esen a ion in au ho i y posi ions (Fe agina,
2019; G önlund e al., 2017). Labo ma ke s in hese coun-
ies also emain seg ega ed by gende (Eu opean Ins i u e
o Gende Equali y, 2017). Rega dless o he No dics’
emphasis on gende equali y in amily policies, pa en hood
is a undamen al sou ce o gende di e ences in ea nings
(Cools & S øm, 2016; Nisén e al., 2022) and au ho i y
posi ions (Byg en & Gähle , 2012; Mandel & Semyono ,
2006). Fu he mo e, he con ibu ion o he mo he hood pen-
al y o he o e all gende inequali ies in he labo ma ke has
inc eased o e ime (Kle en e al., 2019a, 2019b). E idence
sugges s ha , despi e hei a o able ea u es, ex ended am-
ily lea e can hinde subsequen ca ee p og ession (E e s-
son & Du ande , 2011) and lead o la ge ea nings losses o
mo he s (G ube e al., 2023). As a whole, howe e , le els
o ea nings inequali y emain compa a i ely mode a e (F i -
zell e al., 2012). I has been sugges ed ha he ea nings
ajec o ies in he No dic labo ma ke s a e explained o a
la ge ex en by indi iduals’ human capi al, suppo ing he
idea ha No dic social-democ a ic wel a e s a e policies a e
e ec i e in educing o e all labo ma ke inequali ies (Häll-
s en & Yaish, 2022). Indeed, hese wel a e s a es ha e been
iewed as success ul in acili a ing ela i ely high le els o
gende equali y as well as social equali y a la ge (Gos a
Esping-Ande sen, 2009; Ko pi, 2000).
Despi e he conside able in e es in economic gende (in)
equali y, he issue o gende equali y in accumula ed ea n-
ings has so a ecei ed limi ed a en ion, especially ou -
side he U.S. con ex . A ecen s udy es ima ed ha in he
U.S., women bo n in he 1970s accumula ed a ound 60%
o ea nings ela i e o men be ween ages 27 and 35–45 (de
Cas o Gal ao, 2022). The s udy also ound ha p og ess
owa d closing he gende gap has been slowe o coho s
bo n in he 1960s and 1970s han o ea lie U.S. coho s.
Compa a i e s udies ela ed o childbea ing, amily policy,
and he labo ma ke a e imely in he con ex o he No dic
coun ies, especially in ligh o he ecen unexpec ed e il-
i y declines ha ha e occu ed in hese coun ies despi e
hei well-de eloped amily policies (Hells and e al.,
2021). Fe ili y declines ha e also been epo ed in many
o he high-income coun ies, including in he U.S. (Human
Fe ili y Da abase, 2022). Mo eo e , ocused compa isons
o coun ies wi h simila ins i u ional se ings, such as he
No dics, ha e b oade signi icance as hey ha e he po en-
ial o iden i y he easons o he di e ences in ou comes
be ween coun ies (Neye & Ande sson, 2008).
The cu en s udy con ibu es o he exis ing knowledge
on he b oade opic o economic gende (in)equali y by p o-
iding a no el desc ip ion o how he ea nings women and
men ha e accumula ed by midli e a y acco ding o hei
childbea ing his o y (i.e. he numbe and iming o hei
child en) in wo No dic wel a e s a es. Mo e speci ically,
using a simila case compa ison o Finland and Sweden,
we assess he accumula ed ea nings by age 44 and ocus
on he gende gaps in his ea nings measu e ac oss di e -
en g oups.By assessing ea nings accumula ion by midli e
in ecen coho s o women and men bo n in 1974–75, we
ocus on he i s hal o he li e cou se, which is he a ge
o many wel a e s a e policies, including amily policies.
Ou empi ical app oach elies on a unique da a sou ce: he
highly accu a e measu emen o ea nings spanning 25yea s
om No dic adminis a i e egis e s co e ing he ull esi-
den popula ion.
Backg ound
Gende ed Accumula ion o Ea nings o e  heLi e
Cou se
F om a li e cou se pe spec i e, i is impo an o unde s and
how ad an ages and disad an ages accumula e longi udi-
nally o e an indi idual’s li e (DiP e e & Ei ich, 2006).
Economic ad an ages can accumula e o e he li e cou se
o p oduce la ge di e ences han hose measu ed a a sin-
gle poin in ime would sugges (Pa olin & VanHeu elen,
2023). The e is g owing in e es in unde s anding how gen-
de inequali ies in ea nings de elop cumula i ely o e he
li e cou se (de Cas o Gal ao, 2022). Ea nings accumula ed
o e he li e cou se can be iewed as a comp ehensi e meas-
u e o an indi idual’s labo ma ke his o y and accumula ed
economic esou ces (Fasang e al., 2024). Accumula ed
ea nings a e impo an de e minan s o people’s li es yles,
and mo e b oadly o hei li e chances (Tambo ini e al.,
2015). Gende di e ences in accumula ed ea nings o e he
li e cou se also con ibu e o gende di e ences in weal h
accumula ion (Ruel & Hause , 2012), as well as o di e -
ences in pension income la e in li e (Kui alainen e al.,
2020). Mo eo e , hey can be seen as ele an o he ela i e
esou ces o women and men wi hin couples, since ha ing
mo e accumula ed esou ces may ansla e in o ha ing mo e
ba gaining powe (see B ines, 1993; Lundbo g e al., 2017;
Milkie, 2011).
Childbea ing can be ega ded as a undamen al sou ce
o he gende gaps in a ious indica o s o labo ma ke
a achmen and success, such as ea nings le els and he
sha e o women in au ho i y posi ions (Byg en & Gähle ,
2012; Cools & S øm, 2016; Mandel & Semyono , 2005,
2006). The e is e en e idence sugges ing ha he con i-
bu ion o childbea ing o he gende inequali ies in he
labo ma ke has inc eased o e ime (Kle en e al., 2019a,
2019b). Hence, women and men may be expec ed o accu-
mula e ea nings di e en ly o e hei li e cou se depending
on hei childbea ing his o y. The occu ence, as well as he
iming, o i s - ime and subsequen childbea ing, is ele an
687Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
o conside (Huinink & Kohli, 2014). F om he li e cou se
pa adigm ollows he co e expec a ion ha he li e sphe es
o amily and wo k mu ually in luence each o he o e he
li e cou se (Be na di e al., 2019; Fasang e al., 2024). Di -
e ences in accumula ed ea nings based on childbea ing a e
likely o esul om p ocesses ha include bo h hose lead-
ing o he en y in o pa en hood and he bi h o subsequen
child en (selec ion), as well as he e ec s o pa en hood on
women’s employmen , wo king hou s, and wages (Jalo aa a
& Fasang, 2020; Kolk, 2022). These p ocesses o e he indi-
idual li e cou se can be iewed as embedded in a b oade
socie al con ex ha bo h enables and cons ains indi idu-
als in eaching hei goals in di e en li e sphe es, such as
wo k and amily (Be na di e al., 2019; Heckhausen & Buch-
mann, 2019; Huinink & Kohli, 2014). C ucially, i can be
hypo hesized ha he wel a e s a e con ex a ec s he ex en
o which bo h he p ocesses leading up o childbea ing and
he impac s o childbea ing di e be ween women and men.
Selec ion in oChildbea ing byEa nings inFinland
andSweden
The simila cul u al and ins i u ional cha ac e is ics o he
No dic coun ies a e belie ed o ha e con ibu ed o hei
simila e ili y pa e ns, which ha e been cha ac e ized by
s able and ela i ely high coho e ili y a es, close o wo
child en, compa ed o o he Eu opean coun ies (Ande sson
e al., 2009; Hells and e al., 2021). In he No dic coun ies,
he dual-ea ne model has ansla ed in o gende symme y
in he ansi ion o pa en hood, such ha bo h women and
men wi h highe educa ion and a s onge a achmen o he
labo ma ke , including highe ea nings, a e mo e likely
o en e pa en hood (Jalo aa a & Mie inen, 2013; Vika ,
2004). An excep ion o his pa e n is ha young women
wi h li le educa ion and a weak a achmen o he labo ma -
ke ha e ele a ed i s bi h isks (K eyen eld & Ande s-
son, 2014; Mie inen & Jalo aa a, 2020). Fo highe o de
bi h isks, posi i e selec ion by educa ion o labo ma ke
a achmen is weak o e en nega i e, such ha indi iduals
wi h a weak a achmen o he labo ma ke may e en ha e
a sligh ly ele a ed isk o ha ing a hi d bi h (Ande sson
& Sco , 2007; Ande sson e al., 2014; E landsson, 2017).
Rema kably, in he No dic coun ies, gende symme y in
e ili y beha io is also obse ed among hose wi h lowe
le els o educa ion, who a e mo e likely o emain childless
ega dless o gende (Jalo aa a e al., 2022). None heless,
he educa ional g adien in he e en ual numbe o chil-
d en is weak among women bu is no ably posi i e among
men (Jalo aa a e al., 2019). Howe e , he di e ences by
educa ional a ainmen in he isk o emaining childless
a e sligh ly mo e p onounced in Finland han in Sweden,
whe e women and men a e e en mo e simila in his espec
(Jalo aa a e al., 2022). I has also been sugges ed ha
he posi i e selec ion o men wi h highe socioeconomic
posi ions in o a he hood la gely explains he so-called
a he hood p emium, which e e s o a he s ha ing highe
employmen a es, ea nings, and wages on a e age han
childless men (Ma i 2019; Van Winkle and Fasang 2020).
Da a om 2021 show ha he mean age a en y in o mo he -
hood is close o 30yea s in he No dic coun ies (excep Ice-
land), including Finland (30.0) and Sweden (30.1) (S a is a,
2022). Li e ime childlessness is mo e common in Finland
han in he o he No dics (20% s 11–13% in he coho s
bo n in he mid-1970s) (Human Fe ili y Da abase, 2022).
Mo eo e , ha ing a la ge numbe o child en (3 o mo e)
emains somewha mo e common in Finland han in he
o he coun ies (Jalo aa a e al., 2019). Men a e mo e likely
han women o en e pa en hood la e and o emain childless
(Dudel & Klüsene , 2021; Jalo aa a e al., 2022).
Gende ed P ac ices o Pa en ing inFinland
andSweden
The No dic wel a e s a es suppo he well-being o amilies
and gende equali y by p o iding income- es ed and job-
p o ec ed amily- ela ed lea e o pa en s o young child en,
uni e sal access o a o dable childca e, and child- ela ed
income suppo (Daly & Fe agina, 2018). Howe e , he e
a e some impo an ins i u ional di e ences be ween Fin-
land and Sweden ha can be hypo hesized o lead o di e -
ences in pa en ing p ac ices be ween hese wo coun ies.
We hypo hesize ha such di e ences will ha e an impac
on he gende gap in accumula ed ea nings. Taken oge he ,
he amily policies o Sweden can be conside ed o sup-
po mo e s ongly a dual-ea ne -ca e model (Ko pi e al.,
2013). Unde his model, he p o ision o public dayca e
on a ull- ime basis o child en unde school age enables
mo he s o make a con inuous and signi ican commi men o
hei occupa ional ole (dual-ea ne dimension). A he same
ime, a he s a e encou aged o ake an ac i e ole in ca ing
o hei mino child en h ough he p o ision o ea nings-
ela ed, and possibly ea ma ked, pa en al lea e (dual-ca e
dimension). In Finland, he e is a s onge emphasis on a-
di ional amily policies, which p o ide gene al suppo o
amilies wi hou an emphasis on p omo ing gende equali y
in he ea ning o ca ing oles.
Fi s , one impo an di e ence be ween he coun ies
lies in he p o ision and he up ake o pa en al lea e
(Du ande e al., 2019). Sweden has a longe his o y han
Finland o p o iding pa en al lea e wi h ea nings eplace-
men (since 1974 s since 1985) as well as a he s’ quo as
(since 1995 s since 2003). Sweden has also long p o ided
mo e weeks o ea nings- ela ed pa en al lea e han Fin-
land (16mon hs s 9.5mon hs in 2016), and wi h a g ea e
deg ee o lexibili y in hei ake-up. None heless, he di -
e ences be ween he wo coun ies in he leng h o he
688 Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
ma e nal and he pa e nal lea e (as quo as o all a ailable
pa en al lea e) in 2016 we e small (2.2–2.6mon hs in Fin-
land s h ee mon hs in Sweden). The up ake o pa en al
lea e emains gende -asymme ical in bo h coun ies, pa -
icula ly in Finland (Du ande & Lammi-Taskula, 2011).
In 2016, a he s ook 11% o all a ailable lea e days wi h a
daily cash bene i (including ma e ni y and pa e ni y lea e)
in Finland, while he espec i e sha e in Sweden was 28%
(NOSOSCO, 2017).
Second, a e aking pa en al lea e, pa en s in Finland
con inue o ha e he op ion o ca e o hei child a home
un il he child u ns h ee while ecei ing a la - a e ben-
e i , e e ed o as a home ca e allowance o a cash- o -
ca e bene i . This bene i is accompanied by he gua an ee
ha pa en s can e u n o hei job a e aking home ca e
lea e (Hiilamo & Kangas, 2009; Sipila e al., 2010). In
Sweden, his bene i was a ailable only b ie ly in 1994
and 2008–2016 in some municipali ies, bu he ake-up
was much lowe han in Finland (Ellingsæ e , 2014). The
home ca e bene i in Finland is claimed almos exclusi ely
by mo he s. I has been c i icized o encou aging long
spells o mo he s ou side he labo ma ke (Sipila e al.,
2010) and o p omo ing a mo e adi ional amily model
(Ko pi e al., 2013). Indeed, he employmen a e o mo h-
e s o young child en and he sha e o child en en olled
in publicly subsidized dayca e a e lowe in Finland han
in Sweden (Du ande e al., 2021; Eydal & Ros gaa d,
2011; G ødem, 2014; Sipila e al., 2010). In 2016, he
sha e o one- o wo-yea -old child en a ending childca e
was less han 50% in Finland, compa ed o 70% in Sweden
(NOSOSCO, 2017). Ne e heless, while in Sweden pa -
ime wo k is commonly used by mo he s o mee hei
ca e esponsibili ies, in Finland pa - ime wo k has no
ypically been seen as a way o econcile wo k and amily
esponsibili ies (G önlund e al., 2017; Rønsen & Sund-
s öm, 2002).
O e all, i can be hypo hesized ha di e ences in poli-
cies a e he main d i e s o he dissimila pa e ns o ca e
and wo k among pa en s in he wo coun ies. Ye , di e -
ences in cul u al no ms abou he igh way o ca e o chil-
d en may also play a ole (Du ande e al., 2021; Mussino
e al., 2019). Indeed, Finland may be cul u ally mo e sup-
po i e han Sweden o mo he s p o iding home ca e o
child en (Hiilamo & Kangas, 2009). In bo h coun ies,
he e is a clea social pa e n o women wi h a s onge
labo ma ke a achmen e u ning o wo k mo e quickly
a e childbi h (E e sson & Du ande , 2011; Kui o
e al., 2019). Mo eo e , ha ing a pa ne wi h a highe
le el o educa ion and o ea nings is posi i ely associa ed
wi h he ake-up o pa en al lea e among a he s (Du an-
de e al., 2021).
P e ious E idence onGende Gaps inAccumula ed
Ea nings
Two ecen s udies om he No dic con ex assessed he
a ia ion in accumula ed ea nings, wi h one ocusing on he
numbe o child en in Sweden (Kolk, 2022) and he o he
ocusing on he amily li e cou se ype in Finland (Jalo aa a
& Fasang, 2020). The Swedish s udy showed ha ac oss
coho s, he ela ionship be ween labo ea nings accu-
mula ed o e he li e ime and he numbe o child en has
become mo e simila be ween gende s, wi h bo h women
and men o he 1970 coho displaying a e e sed U-shaped
ela ionship. While he s udy did no assess ea nings di e -
ences by gende , i showed ha men had highe ea nings
han women, e en in he mos ecen coho s. The Finnish
s udy examined he a ia ion in ea nings accumula ed by
age 39 in he 1969–70 coho s, and ound ha a he s who
had ma ied la e had ea ned mo e han o he men. Among
women, he s udy obse ed ha mo he s who had ma ied
la e and childless women wi h a his o y o cohabi a ion had
highe ea nings han o he women. Howe e , he au ho s
emphasized ha he wi hin-gende di e ences be ween
g oups wi h di e en amily li e cou ses we e modes com-
pa ed o he o e all gende di e ences in accumula ed ea n-
ings, which amoun ed o o e 30%.
While e idence om o he high-income coun ies is
limi ed, i also poin s o no able and e en la ge gaps in
accumula ed ea nings be ween women and men. An ea -
lie c oss-compa a i e s udy p edic ed smalle gende gaps
in accumula ed ea nings by age 45 in he No dic coun ies
han elsewhe e, wi h he di e ences amoun ing o 32–44%
o men’s ea nings in No way and Finland (Sigle-Rush on &
Wald ogel, 2007). Di e ences be ween mo he s and o he
women, and be ween mo he s o one and wo child en, we e
also p edic ed o be smalle in he No dic coun ies han in
he o he s udied coun ies. Simila ly, ano he c oss-coun y
compa ison ound ha o women, he long- e m ea nings
penal y associa ed wi h he bi h o he i s child was high-
es in Ge man-speaking coun ies (51–61%), ollowed by
English-speaking coun ies (31%–44), and was lowe in
Scandina ian coun ies (i.e. Denma k and Sweden: 21–26%)
(Kle en e al., 2019a, 2019b). In con as , he s udy ound
ha pa en hood had no long- e m e ec on men’s ea nings.
An ea lie s udy es ima ed ha women in he UK would lose
on a e age o 47% o hei ea nings a e becoming mo h-
e s, bu he loss was much smalle o women wi h uni e -
si y deg ees (Da ies e al., 2000). A ecen s udy es ima ed
an o e all gende gap in accumula ed li e ime ea nings in
Ge many o mo e han 50%, and an e en la ge gap among
pa en s wi h mo e child en (Glaubi z e al., 2022). P e i-
ous s udies conduc ed in he U.S. ound an o e all gap o
app oxima ely 40% in accumula ed midli e ea nings be ween
women and men (de Cas o Gal ao, 2022), and a la ge gap

689Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
among indi iduals wi h lowe le els o educa ional a ain-
men (Kim e al., 2015). Fu he mo e, while gende gaps in
accumula ed ea nings by he iming o pa en hood (i.e. he
age a i s bi h) ha e no been p ope ly assessed, i has been
shown ha he la e iming o mo he hood is associa ed wi h
highe li e ime ea nings in Denma k and Sweden (Can alini
e al., 2017; Leung e al., 2016).
Resea ch Ques ions
This s udy u ilizes high-quali y da a om he Finnish and
Swedish popula ion egis e s co e ing de ailed demog aphic
and labo ma ke da a on all pe manen esiden s in he
espec i e coun ies. This s udy aims o p o ide a b oad
desc ip ion o he gende di e ences in indi idual accumu-
la ed ea nings by midli e associa ed wi h childbea ing his-
o y in wo No dic coun ies. In doing so, we hope o shed
ligh on he pa e ns ypical o he No dic social-democ a ic
wel a e egime and o highligh any coun y-speci ic pa -
e ns. We calcula e accumula ed ea nings by gende , child-
bea ing his o y (i.e. dis inguishing be ween childless, i s
pa i y, second pa i y, and hi d pa i y o highe ; as well as
be ween ea ly and la e pa en s), and educa ional a ainmen .
Educa ion is conside ed p ima ily an indica o o human
capi al (Baum, 2002), and a s ong co ela e o he iming
o childbea ing (i.e. he age a i s bi h) (Ande sson e al.,
2009; Nisén e al., 2014). We s udy accumula ed ea nings
o e he li e cou se a he indi idual a he han a he house-
hold le el gi en he high deg ee o ins abili y o ma i al
and cohabi ing unions in con empo a y socie ies (Hä könen,
2014). We aim o answe he ollowing esea ch ques ions
(RQ):
RQ1 How is childbea ing his o y ela ed o he ea n-
ings accumula ed by midli e among women and men
in wo No dic wel a e s a es?
In bo h coun ies, we expec he ela ionship be ween
he numbe o child en and he accumula ed ea nings o be
posi i e among men, and o be ei he nega i e o o ollow
a e e sed U-shaped pa e n among women. This is p ima -
ily because we assume ha pa en s a e posi i ely selec ed
on educa ion and ea nings, bu ha ing a la ge numbe o
child en has addi i e nega i e e ec s on women’s bu no
men’s ca ee s. The nega i e e ec s a e pa ly due o he
longe ime spen on amily lea e,1 which may acili a e he
dep ecia ion and he slowe accumula ion o human capi-
al (Mince & O ek, 1982; Mince & Polachek, 1974), as
well as po en ial ea nings losses du ing he lea e (Baum,
2002). Fu he mo e, ca ee -o ien ed women end o en e
mo he hood la e (Ande sson e al., 2009), which may mi -
iga e he accumula ion o he nega i e e ec s o mo he -
hood (Amuedo-Do an es & Kimmel, 2005; B a i & Ca alli,
2014; Do en, 2019). Fo example, la e iming may allow
women o es ablish hemsel es in he labo ma ke be o e
en e ing mo he hood (T oske & Voicu, 2013).
RQ2 How does he gende gap in accumula ed ea n-
ings a y by childbea ing his o y in he wo wel a e
s a es?
In bo h coun ies, he gende gap in accumula ed ea nings
is expec ed o exis ega dless o childbea ing his o y, bu
o be la ge among hose wi h mo e child en. In addi ion
o he poin s aised unde RQ1, his expec a ion is based
on occupa ional gende seg ega ion (Hook e al., 2022), as
well as po en ial s a is ical disc imina ion in he labo ma ke
(see, e.g. E e sson & Du ande , 2011), which may a ec
women’s ea nings ega dless o hei numbe o child en.
Fu he mo e, he la e iming o childbea ing may dec ease
he gende gap by educing he amoun o ime ha mo he -
hood can ha e a nega i e impac on he labo ma ke (Can-
alini e al., 2017; Leung e al., 2016; Nisén e al., 2022).
RQ3 How does his gende gap a y by educa ional
a ainmen in he wo wel a e s a es?
In bo h coun ies, he gende gap in accumula ed ea n-
ings is expec ed o be la ge among hose wi h lowe le els
o educa ional a ainmen . This expec a ion ollows om he
obse a ion ha among pa en s wi h less educa ion, women
a e mo e likely o ake long pe iods o amily lea e, lea e-
sha ing p ac ices a e less gende -symme ical, and he iming
o childbea ing is ea lie on a e age. Al e na i ely, he gende
gap could be simila o e en wide among highly educa ed
pa en s, gi en he la ge po en ial ea nings losses due o
childbea ing and child ea ing among mo e educa ed women
(Buckles, 2008; Lundbo g e al., 2017). In addi ion, he im-
ing may play a g ea e ole o highly educa ed women, as
pos poning mo he hood migh p o ide addi ional bene i s
o hei labo ma ke pa icipa ion. This ollows om hei
(po en ial) s eepe ea nings ajec o ies in he ea ly s ages o
hei ca ee s (Amuedo-Do an es & Kimmel, 2005; Do en,
2019; He , 2016; Mille , 2011) and he impo ance o imely
in es men s in wo k expe ience (Ligh & U e a, 1995).
RQ4 A e he gende gaps in accumula ed ea nings
la ge o smalle in Finland compa ed o in Sweden?
The di e ences based on childbea ing his o y, as well as
he o e all gende gaps, in accumula ed ea nings a e gene -
ally expec ed o be la ge in Finland han in Sweden, gi en
he endency o Finnish women o ake longe pe iods o
amily lea e a e childbi h and he less gende -symme -
ical lea e-sha ing p ac ices in Finland. These coun y
1 Family lea e e e s o he combina ion o pa en al lea e (includ-
ing ma e ni y/pa e ni y lea e) and any home ca e lea e o he ca e o
child en aken by a pa en a e pa en al lea e.
690 Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
di e ences in he gende gaps a e expec ed o be mo e p o-
nounced among pa en s wi h a highe numbe o child en.
This assump ion is p ima ily based on indings showing he
accumula ion o nega i e e ec s o mo he s o mul iple
child en, which a e pa ially a ibu able o aking se e al
ca ee b eaks (T oske & Voicu, 2013). I is also possible
ha such di e ences a e mo e isible among indi iduals
who en e pa en hood ea lie (see Lo en zen e al., 2019),
and among less highly educa ed g oups. Mo he s wi h low
educa ion a e pa icula ly likely o make use o he cash- o -
ca e bene i in Finland, which could ha e nega i e e ec s on
hei subsequen ea nings.
Me hodology
Da a andVa iables
The s udy is based on high-quali y Finnish and Swedish
egis e da a co e ing he o al popula ions esiding pe ma-
nen ly in hese coun ies. The analy ical sample consis s o
113,415 indi iduals bo n in Finland and 183,946 indi iduals
bo n in Sweden in 1974–1975. We include women and men
who we e cons an ly esiding in he coun y om age 20
un il age 44 (i.e. who had no emig a ed in any o he ana-
lyzed yea s, and o whom we ha e in o ma ion on ea nings
o each yea ). The co e s eng h o using indi idual-le el
adminis a i e da a is ha indi iduals’ ea ning measu es
om se e al yea s can be combined wi h o he measu es,
including childbea ing his o y and educa ional a ainmen .
Accumula ed Ea nings
Ea nings accumula ed by midli e a e measu ed as a o al
o he annual (g oss) wo k ea nings o sala ied employees
and en ep eneu ea nings subjec o s a e axa ion be ween
ages 20 and 44 (25yea s). This age span co e s he pe iod
in he li e cou se when indi iduals ypically a ain deg ees,
es ablish hemsel es in he labo ma ke , and o m amilies
and ha e child en, and hus ake amily lea e om wo k o
ca e o child en. We conduc a sensi i i y analysis o see
how adding employmen -based bene i s o he labo ea n-
ings in luence he gende gaps in accumula ed ea nings (see
he end o he Resul s sec ion). Employmen -based bene i s
include pa en al lea e bene i s (including pa e ni y and
ma e ni y lea e) and sickness lea e bene i s, and in he case
o Finland, also home ca e allowance bene i s.2
We p esen accumula ed ea nings based on he p ice
le el o 2019 eu os. We ha monize ou ea nings measu e
o enhance coun y compa abili y by i s con e ing annual
ea nings in Sweden measu ed in Swedish k ona (SEK) o
eu os using he annual con e sion a es p o ided by Eu os a
(Eu os a , 2023a), and by applying he annual a es o li -
ing cos s o adjus o he di e ences in hese cos s be ween
he wo coun ies (Eu os a , 2023). Nex , we con e eu os
om each yea in o 2019 eu os by adjus ing o in la ion
o e he yea s co e ed (1992–2019) using he Finnish p ice
index (OSF, 2023). We op-code he (gende -speci ic) 1% o
women and men wi h he highes ea nings in bo h coun ies
in o de o a oid he s ong in luence o ou lie s (in e ec ,
men wi h ex emely high ea nings) on he indings. O he
o al analy ical samples, 0.6% in Finland 0.5% in Sweden
had no ea nings. Ea nings a e epo ed in housands o
eu os.
Childbea ing His o y
We measu e an indi idual’s childbea ing his o y as he
o al numbe o child en bo n o he pe son a he end o he
yea when she o he u ned 44, based on mon hly eco ds
o bi hs o all egis e ed (biological) child en. We g oup
oge he pa en s who had h ee o mo e child en. In addi-
ion, o analyze how he iming o childbea ing is ela ed
o he gende gaps in accumula ed ea nings among pa en s,
we i s g oup pa en s by gende . Then, wi hin each gende ,
we dis inguish be ween la e and ea ly pa en s. Indi iduals
who had hei i s child a an age below he median a e ca -
ego ized as “ea ly” pa en s, while hose who had hei i s
child a an age abo e (and including) he median a e classi-
ied as “la e” pa en s. Educa ion-speci ic medians a e used
he e gi en ha he a e age iming o he i s bi h a ies
s ongly by he le el o educa ional a ainmen , especially in
women (Nisén e al., 2014). The e o e, i can be a gued ha
he same age a i s bi h has a di e en meaning depend-
ing on he le el o educa ion (Ande sson e al., 2009). Age
44 gene ally ep esen s he end o he ep oduc i e li e span
o women, and e y ew men ha e child en a e his age
(Dudel & Klüsene , 2021; Nisén e al., 2014).
Educa ional A ainmen
We dis inguish be ween h ee le els o educa ional a ain-
men based on he highes deg ee a ained: low e e s o
compulso y educa ion only (nine yea s), medium e e s o
an academic o oca ional highe seconda y-le el deg ee
(2–3yea s), and high e e s o an academic o oca ional
e ia y-le el deg ee ( h ee o mo e yea s). The le els o
2 We do no ha e he in o ma ion o he yea 1994 in Finland, which
is he yea in which he coho bo n in 1975 u ns 20. Howe e , his
is no likely o bias ou indings in any meaning ul way gi en he low
le els o e ili y a hese ages: 5.4% o he Finnish sample had a bi h
by he end o he yea hey u ned 20.
691Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
educa ional a ainmen used he e a e con en ional in he
No dic con ex (see, e.g. Jalo aa a e al., 2019). Fo Fin-
land, he in o ma ion was ob ained using S a is ics Finland’s
egis e da a on he highes comple ed deg ee beyond he
compulso y basic educa ion (up o nine yea s), which means
ha he lowes le el was in e ed om he ac ha he da a
we e missing. The egis e on educa ional deg ees in Finland
is o e y high quali y, and misclassi ica ion o educa ional
a ainmen based on his p ocedu e is he e o e negligible.
Analy ical Me hod
The analysis is based on a desc ip ion o g oup-speci ic
means and an assessmen o he gende gaps ac oss g oups.
The gende gap is de ined as he di e ence be ween wom-
en’s and men’s mean ea nings ela i e o he mean ea nings
o men wi hin a g oup (in pe cen ). TablesA1 and A2 in
he Appendix include 95% con idence in e als o all he
gende -speci ic ea nings mean es ima es. The con idence
Table 1 Dis ibu ion o a iables
Sou ce: Own calcula ions based on Finnish and Swedish egis e da a
Finland: Women (N = 55,365) Sweden: Women (N = 89,307)
Accumula ed ea nings Mean SD Min Max Mean SD Min Max
(1000 eu os) 521 280 0 1,450 546 241 0 1,294
Numbe o child en Childless One Two ≥ Th ee Childless One Two ≥ Th ee
(%) 19 16 37 28 13 14 49 25
Timing: Ea ly (%) 24 44 72 24 46 72
Timing: La e (%) 76 56 28 76 54 28
Educa ional a ainm. Low Medium High Low Medium High
(%) 5 35 59 4 44 52
Finland: Men (N = 58,050) Sweden: Men (N = 94,639)
Accumula ed ea nings M SD Min Max M SD Min Max
(1000 eu os) 763 401 0 2,071 764 323 0 1,788
Numbe o child en Childless One Two ≥ Th ee Childless One Two ≥ Th ee
(%) 27 16 33 24 21 14 44 21
Timing: Ea ly (%) 28 45 72 28 47 71
Timing: La e (%) 73 55 28 72 53 29
Educa ional a ainm. Low Medium High Low Medium High
(%) 11 50 39 7 58 36
Table 2 Ea nings accumula ed by midli e (1000 eu os) by numbe and iming o child en, and educa ional a ainmen
Sou ce: Own calcula ions based on Finnish and Swedish egis e da a
Finland: Women (N = 55,365) Sweden: Women (N = 89,307)
Numbe o child en Childless One Two ≥ Th ee Childless One Two ≥ Th ee
537 554 566 431 513 550 579 489
Timing: Ea ly 503 545 415 497 553 467
Timing: La e 567 578 460 571 606 553
Educa ional a ainm. Low Medium High Low Medium High
265 410 609 300 500 601
Finland: Men (N = 58,050) Sweden: Men (N = 94,639)
Numbe o child en Childless One Two ≥ Th ee Childless One Two ≥ Th ee
571 747 866 848 613 737 836 803
Timing: Ea ly 694 873 853 722 852 809
Timing: La e 765 861 839 747 838 827
Educa ional a ainm. Low Medium High Low Medium High
471 688 937 553 748 838
692 Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
in e als o men and women do no o e lap in any o he
s udied g oups. We conduc ed a sensi i i y analysis using
he median ins ead o he mean (see he end o he Resul s
sec ion).
Resul s
Childbea ing His o y andEa nings Accumula ed
byMidli e Among Women andMen (RQ1 & RQ4)
The e a e ela i ely la ge di e ences in he le els o accu-
mula ed ea nings be ween women and men bo n in Finland
and Sweden in 1974–75. In Finland, men ha e ea ned on
a e age 763,000 eu os by he age o 44, while women ha e
ea ned 521,000 eu os by ha age (Table1). This means ha ,
by he age o 44, on a e age, Finnish women ha e ea ned
32% less han Finnish men. In Sweden, men ha e ea ned
on a e age 764,000 eu os and women ha e ea ned 546,000
eu os by age 44, which ep esen s a gende gap o 29%.
These indings a e pa icula ly no ewo hy gi en ha he
women in hese coho s a e mo e highly educa ed han he
men, especially in Finland: hal o women in Sweden (52%)
and o e hal women in Finland (59%) ha e a ained a e -
ia y-le el deg ee, compa ed o only 36% o men in Sweden
39% o men in Finland. Meanwhile, only a small sha e o
men in Finland (11%) and in Sweden (7%) ha e no a ained
a seconda y deg ee, and an e en smalle sha e o women
ha e no schooling beyond he compulso y le el (5% and
4%, espec i ely).
In e ms o he numbe o child en, men s and ou as mak-
ing up a la ge sha e o hose who emain childless in bo h
coun ies (27% o men s 19% o women in Finland; 21%
o men s 13% o women in Sweden). Howe e , he le els
o childlessness a e on a e age highe in Finland han in
Sweden (Table1).The mos common inal numbe o chil-
d en a age 44 in bo h coun ies is wo child en: in Sweden,
49% o women and 44% o men ha e wo child en, while in
Finland, 37% o women and 33% o men ha e wo child en.
Ha ing one child is no common in ei he coun y: among
bo h women and men, 16% a e one-child pa en s in Finland
and 14% a e one-child pa en s in Sweden. Ha ing h ee o
mo e child en is mo e common in Finland han in Sweden
(28% o women and 24% o men in Finland; 25% o women
and 21% o men in Sweden). As expec ed, he la e iming
o he i s bi h is mo e common among indi iduals wi h a
lowe numbe o child en in bo h coun ies.
The e is a e e sed U-shaped associa ion be ween he
inal numbe o child en and he ea nings accumula ed by
age 44, bu he s eng h o his associa ion a ies be ween
gende s and ac oss coun ies (Table2 and Fig.1). Among
bo h women and men, hose wi h wo child en ha e accumu-
la ed he highes ea nings, bu among women, he di e ences
be ween hose wi h one child and hose wi h no child en
a e small, especially in Finland. Among men, by con as ,
pa i y is s ongly posi i ely associa ed wi h ea nings up o
wo child en. Men and women wi h h ee o mo e child en
gene ally ea n less han hose wi h wo child en. This di e -
ence is especially la ge among Finnish women, wi h hose
wi h h ee o mo e child en ea ning less han o he women.
In Sweden, he ea nings o women wi h h ee o mo e chil-
d en a e close o he ea nings o childless women. O e all,
he ela ionship o he numbe o child en wi h accumu-
la ed ea nings by age 44 is mo e symme ical by gende in
Sweden han in Finland. Among mo he s in bo h coun ies,
hose who en e ed mo he hood la e ha e highe ea nings
Fig. 1 Ea nings accumula ed by midli e and 95% con idence in e al by gende and numbe o child en in a Finland b Sweden
699Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
2016). This adds o he economic isk aced by Finnish mo h-
e s wi h long ca e episodes. A he same ime, childless men
and women can be conside ed a ulne able g oup a olde ages,
no leas because hey may lack po en ial suppo om close
amily membe s, such as hei own child en. In he No dic
con ex , hose wi hou child en do no ha e pa icula ly high
ea nings, which would help hem o access al e na i e means
o suppo (see also Fasang e al., 2024). Childless women wi h
low o medium educa ion and childless men wi h low educa-
ion ha e ela i ely low ea nings, ye in Finland, childless men
wi h medium educa ion ea n mo e han women on a e age.
Thus, i is impo an o pay a en ion o he well-being o hose
wi hou child en, especially in ligh o he inc easing le els
o childlessness among people wi h ela i ely low educa ion
in he No dic con ex —and gi en he al eady high le els o
childlessness in Finland (Jalo aa a e al., 2019).
The esul s may ha e ele ance in ligh o he cu en low
pe iod e ili y in Finland (2022: 1.32) (OSF, 2024). We can
specula e ha ins i u ional suppo and cul u al expec a ions
o long absences om paid wo k, combined wi h any issues
ha women ace in es ablishing hemsel es in he labo ma ke
be o e (po en ially) ha ing child en, may ha e con ibu ed o
he coun y’s cu en low e ili y landscape. All o he No -
dic coun ies, along wi h many o he coun ies, ha e ecen ly
epo ed declining e ili y a es. Howe e , among he No dics,
Finland anks highes in e ms o he s eng h o he decline, and
i cu en ly has he lowes le els o pe iod and coho e ili y
(Hells and e al., 2021). The mo e adi ional pa e n o pa en -
ing in Finland compa ed o ha in Sweden may help o explain
he cu en low e ili y landscape o Finland. No ms suppo ing
he long absences o mo he s om he labo ma ke in a dual-
ea ne socie y may lead women o wan o ge i mly es ablished
in he labo ma ke be o e aking a long b eak. This a gumen is
bols e ed by he obse a ion ha in he No dics, ha ing a s ong
a achmen o he labo ma ke is a p e equisi e o en e ing pa -
en hood ega dless o gende . Howe e , he expec a ion ha
mo he s will ake long ca ee b eaks may be a ba ie o women
in es ablishing hei ca ee s a all, as e idenced, o ins ance,
by hei highe a es o empo a y employmen (ILO, 2016).
A s ongly gende ed pa e n o lea e use combined wi h he
p o ision o long lea es, as in Finland, can signal o (po en ial)
employe s ha young women a e a isk o aking long ca ee
b eaks (see Hegewisch & Go nick, 2013).
Fu he mo e, i is plausible ha “no ma i e con usion”
a ound gende oles migh con ibu e o he low pe iod e il-
i y a es in Finland (Gøs a Esping-Ande sen & Billa i, 2015).
Women’s much highe le els o educa ion compa ed o men’s
aise he expec a ions o women’s ea nings—bu hese a e
unlikely o be me i i emains he no m ha long pe iods
o amily lea e a e aken almos exclusi ely by women. I
would be in line wi h con empo a y heo izing on e ili y
(Goldscheide e al., 2015; McDonald, 2000; Neye e al.,
2013) o assume ha a g ea e disc epancy be ween he le el
o gende equali y in he amily sphe e and he public sphe e
(i.e. educa ion, employmen )—in his case in Finland com-
pa ed o in Sweden—con ibu es o lowe e ili y. Mo eo e ,
o he ex en ha he cu en esul s a e uly a ibu able o he
e ec s o childbea ing on mo he s’ ea nings, hey imply ha
he ecen e ili y declines will educe he a e age gende gap
in accumula ed ea nings, especially in Finland.
Conclusion
To conclude, his s udy shows ha childbea ing s ongly modi-
ies he gende gap in ea nings accumula ed by midli e in he
No dic wel a e s a e con ex —especially in Finland—and ha
he gende gap in accumula ed ea nings is mode a ely smalle
o highly educa ed women han o hei less educa ed coun e -
pa s. Ou esul s show ha despi e hei s ong policy emphasis
on gende equali y and hei success in achie ing high le els
o emale labo o ce pa icipa ion, e en he No dic wel a e
s a es a e a om closing he gende gap in ea nings accu-
mula ed o e he i s hal o he li e cou se. Ou esul s, based
on a compa a i e analysis, sugges ha go e nmen s seeking
o achie e gende equali y should be cau ious abou p o iding
long amily- ela ed lea e wi h la - a e compensa ion. I is also
impo an o hem o pay a en ion o he cumula i e economic
impac s o he up ake o amily lea e o indi iduals ac oss
educa ional g oups. To suppo social change aimed a p omo -
ing economic gende equali y, i is p e e able o go e nmen s
o in es in a o dable childca e as well as pa en al lea e wi h
ea nings eplacemen (Fe agina & Seeleib-Kaise , 2015). The
ela i ely low le els o ea nings accumula ed by hose wi hou
child en in he No dic con ex also dese e a en ion. We call
o mo e schola ly in e es in in es iga ing how economic gen-
de inequali ies accumula e ac oss he li e cou se in di e en
wel a e s a e con ex s. The dispa i ies in accumula ed ea nings
canno be cap u ed by c oss-sec ional es ima es o ea nings
gaps. As da a limi a ions ha e been among he easons o he
limi ed p io e idence on gende inequali ies in accumula ed
ea nings, he inc easing a ailabili y o longi udinal indi idual-
le el da a will be help ul.
Appendix
See Tables5, 6 and Figs.6, 7, 8, 9, and 10.

700 Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
Table 5 Ea nings accumula ed
by midli e by gende , numbe
and iming o child en, and
educa ional a ainmen in
Finland: mean and 95%
con idence in e al (CI)
Sou ce: Own calcula ions based on Finnish egis e da a
No e:The gende gap is de ined as he di e ence be ween women’s and men’s mean accumula ed ea nings
ela i e o he mean accumula ed ea nings o men wi hin a g oup (in pe cen )
Educa ional N. and iming Women Men Gende
a ainmen o child en Mean (95% CI) Mean (95% CI) Gap (%)
Low Childless 244 (221–266) 310 (296–324) 21
One 296 (274–319) 488 (468–508) 39
Ea ly 220 (178–262) 389 (356–422) 43
La e 322 (297–348) 539 (515–563) 40
Two 330 (312–347) 591 (573–609) 44
Ea ly 306 (278–333) 548 (520–575) 44
La e 346 (324–369) 624 (601–647) 44
≥ Th ee 222 (209–235) 548 (520–575) 59
Ea ly 205 (190–220) 572 (549–594) 64
La e 256 (233–278) 627 (597–657) 59
To al 265 (256–274) 471 (462–481) 44
Medium Childless 430 (421–439) 539 (532–546) 20
One 449 (441–456) 701 (692–710) 36
Ea ly 422 (406–437) 676 (659–693) 38
La e 458 (449–467) 711 (700–722) 36
Two 445 (440–450) 773 (766–780) 42
Ea ly 428 (421–435) 767 (757–777) 44
La e 457 (450–463) 778 (769–787) 41
≥ Th ee 340 (335–345) 758 (751–766) 55
Ea ly 327 (322–333) 759 (750–767) 57
La e 371 (362–380) 758 (743–772) 51
To al 410 (407–413) 688 (684–692) 40
High Childless 639 (632–647) 745 (734–756) 14
One 645 (638–653) 905 (892–918) 29
Ea ly 594 (580–608) 893 (868–918) 33
La e 660 (651–669) 908 (893–923) 27
Two 636 (632–641) 1003 (995–1,011) 37
Ea ly 615 (608–621) 1028 (1,016–1,039) 40
La e 654 (648–660) 983 (973–994) 34
≥ Th ee 523 (517–528) 1021 (1,011–1,032) 49
Ea ly 507 (500–513) 1029 (1,017–1,041) 51
La e 566 (555–578) 1001 (980–1,021) 43
To al 609 (606–612) 937 (932–942) 35
To al Childless 537 (531–543) 571 (565–577) 6
One 554 (549–560) 747 (739–754) 26
Ea ly 506 (495–517) 697 (682–711) 27
La e 570 (563–576) 766 (757–774) 26
Two 566 (562–569) 866 (861–871) 35
Ea ly 549 (544–554) 871 (863–880) 37
La e 579 (574–584) 862 (855–869) 33
≥ Th ee 431 (427–435) 849 (842–855) 49
Ea ly 418 (414–423) 852 (844–859) 51
La e 462 (454–470) 841 (829–853) 45
To al 521 (518–523) 763 (760–766) 32
701Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
Table 6 Ea nings accumula ed
by midli e by gende , numbe
and iming o child en, and
educa ional a ainmen in
Sweden: mean and 95%
con idence in e al (CI)
Sou ce: Own calcula ions based on Swedish egis e da a
No e:The gende gap is de ined as he di e ence be ween women’s and men’s mean accumula ed ea nings
ela i e o he mean accumula ed ea nings o men wi hin a g oup (in pe cen )
Educa ional N. and iming Women Men Gende
a ainmen o child en Mean (95% CI) Mean (95% CI) Gap (%)
Low Childless 199 (180–218) 357 (342–372) 44
One 327 (305–349) 571 (550–592) 43
Ea ly 266 (227–305) 530 (493–567) 50
La e 351 (324–378) 594 (568–620) 41
Two 382 (367–397) 688 (675–701) 44
Ea ly 328 (304–352) 674 (654–695) 51
La e 423 (403–443) 702 (684–719) 40
≥ Th ee 274 (260–287) 620 (604–637) 56
Ea ly 248 (233–264) 600 (580–620) 59
La e 336 (310–363) 671 (643–700) 50
To al 300 (291–308) 553 (544–562) 46
Medium Childless 482 (474–489) 618 (613–624) 22
One 520 (514–526) 729 (723–735) 29
Ea ly 463 (451–474) 709 (698–721) 35
La e 543 (536–550) 740 (733–747) 27
Two 533 (530–535) 812 (809–816) 34
Ea ly 501 (496–505) 815 (810–820) 39
La e 560 (556–565) 815 (810–821) 31
≥ Th ee 435 (432–439) 769 (764–774) 43
Ea ly 413 (409–418) 766 (759–772) 46
La e 498 (489–506) 790 (778–802) 37
To al 500 (498–502) 748 (746–751) 33
High Childless 590 (583–597) 681 (673–690) 13
One 606 (600–612) 795 (785–804) 24
Ea ly 572 (559–586) 831 (804–859) 31
La e 620 (613–628) 793 (781–805) 22
Two 622 (619–625) 887 (882–892) 30
Ea ly 601 (597–605) 924 (915–933) 35
La e 650 (646–655) 887 (877–896) 27
≥ Th ee 556 (552–560) 888 (881–896) 37
Ea ly 535 (531–540) 915 (903–927) 41
La e 618 (608–627) 912 (890–934) 32
To al 601 (599–603) 838 (834–841) 28
To al Childless 513 (507–518) 613 (609–618) 16
One 550 (546–555) 737 (732–742) 25
Ea ly 497 (488–506) 722 (711–732) 31
La e 606 (603–609) 838 (833–842) 28
Two 579 (576–581) 836 (833–839) 31
Ea ly 571 (566–577) 747 (741–753) 24
La e 467 (463–470) 809 (803–815) 42
≥ Th ee 489 (486–492) 803 (799–807) 39
Ea ly 553 (551–556) 852 (848–857) 35
La e 553 (546–559) 827 (816–838) 33
To al 546 (544–548) 764 (762–766) 29
702 Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
Fig. 6 Ea nings accumula ed by midli e and 95% con idence in e al by gende , numbe o child en, and educa ional a ainmen in a Finland b
Sweden. Ea nings include employmen -based bene i s
Fig. 7 Ea nings accumula ed by midli e and 95% con idence in e al by gende , numbe o child en, and educa ional a ainmen in a-b Finland
c-d Sweden. Ea nings include employmen -based bene i s
703Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
Fig. 8 Gende gap in ea nings accumula ed by midli e by numbe o child en in a Finland b Sweden. Ea nings include employmen -based ben-
e i s
Fig. 9 Gende gap in ea nings accumula ed by midli e by numbe o child en and educa ional a ainmen in a Finland b Sweden. Ea nings
include employmen -based bene i s
704 Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
Acknowledgemen s We a e hank ul o he eedback we ecei ed on
he manusc ip om pa icipan s o he SUDA Colloquium, pa ici-
pan s o he FLUX semina s, and he discussan o he session “Gen-
de inequali y and pa en hood” a he Popula ion Associa ion Ame ica
Annual Mee ing in 2023. We also hank P o esso E a Ös e backa o
he kind ad ice and wo anonymous e iewe s and he jou nal edi o s
o aluable eedback.
Au ho Con ibu ions All au ho s con ibu ed o he s udy concep ion
and design. Da a p epa a ion and analysis we e pe o med by J. Nisén
and A. E landsson. The i s d a o he manusc ip was w i en by J.
Nisén and all au ho s commen ed on p e ious e sions o he manu-
sc ip . All au ho s ead and app o ed he inal manusc ip .
Funding Open Access unding p o ided by Uni e si y o Tu ku (includ-
ing Tu ku Uni e si y Cen al Hospi al). We g a e ully acknowledge und-
ing om he Academy o Finland (decisions 332863 o JN, 321264 o MJ
and 320162 o INVEST Flagship) and he S a egic Resea ch Council
(decision 345130 o FLUX). AE acknowledges inancial suppo om
he Swedish Resea ch Council o Heal h, Wo king Li e and Wel a e
(FORTE), g an numbe 2020–00639. JN acknowledges inancial suppo
om he ROCKWOOL Founda ion o he p ojec “De e minan s o la e
and o gone pa en hood in he No dic coun ies”.
Da a A ailabili y The o iginal indi idual-le el da a a e s o ed a S a is-
ics Finland and S a is ics Sweden and a e only a ailable o au ho ized
esea che s. Fo mo e in o ma ion abou how o eques access o hese
da a, please isi h ps:// s a . i/ up/ u ki japal elu / index_ en. h ml and h ps://
www. scb. se/ en/ se i ces/ o de ing- da a- and- s a i s ics/ mic o da a/. The Finn-
ish egis e da a se was analyzed unde license numbe TK-53–1119-17.
Decla a ions
Con lic o in e es The au ho s decla e no con lic o in e es o epo .
Open Access This a icle is licensed unde a C ea i e Commons A i-
bu ion 4.0 In e na ional License, which pe mi s use, sha ing, adap a-
ion, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion in any medium o o ma , as long
as you gi e app op ia e c edi o he o iginal au ho (s) and he sou ce,
p o ide a link o he C ea i e Commons licence, and indica e i changes
we e made. The images o o he hi d pa y ma e ial in his a icle a e
included in he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence, unless indica ed
o he wise in a c edi line o he ma e ial. I ma e ial is no included in
he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence and you in ended use is no
pe mi ed by s a u o y egula ion o exceeds he pe mi ed use, you will
need o ob ain pe mission di ec ly om he copy igh holde . To iew a
copy o his licence, isi h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/.
Re e ences
Amuedo-Do an es, C., & Kimmel, J. (2005). The mo he hood wage
gap o women in he Uni ed S a es: The impo ance o college
and e ili y delay. Re iew o Economics o he Household, 3,
17–48. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s11150- 004- 0978-9
Ande sson, G., & Sco , K. (2007). Childbea ing dynamics o couples in
a uni e salis ic wel a e s a e: The ole o labo -ma ke s a us, coun-
y o o igin, and gende . Demog aphic Resea ch, 17, 897–938.
Ande sson, G., Rønsen, M., Knudsen, L. B., Lappegå d, T., Neye ,
G., Sk ede, K., Teschne , K., & Vika , A. (2009). Coho e il-
i y pa e ns in he No dic coun ies. Demog aphic Resea ch, 20,
313–352.
Ande sson, G., K eyen eld, M., & Mika, T. (2014). Wel a e s a e
con ex , emale labou -ma ke a achmen and childbea ing in
Ge many and Denma k. Jou nal o Popula ion Resea ch, 31(4),
287–316. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s12546- 014- 9135-3
Baum, C. L. (2002). The e ec o wo k in e up ions on women’s
wages. Labou , 16(1), 1–37. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1111/ 1467- 9914.
00185
Be na di, L., Huinink, J., & Se e s en, R. A., J . (2019). The li e
cou se cube: A ool o s udying li es. Ad ances in Li e Cou se
Resea ch, 41, 100258. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. alc . 2018. 11. 004
B a i, M., & Ca alli, L. (2014). Delayed i s bi h and new mo h-
e s’ labo ma ke ou comes: E idence om biological e ili y
shocks. Eu opean Jou nal o Popula ion, 30, 35–63. h ps:// doi.
o g/ 10. 1007/ s10680- 013- 9301-x
B ines, J. (1993). The exchange alue o housewo k. Ra ionali y and
Socie y, 5(3), 302–340. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 10434 63193
00500 3003
Buckles, K. (2008). Unde s anding he e u ns o delayed childbea -
ing o wo king women. Ame ican Economic Re iew, 98(2),
403–407. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1257/ ae . 98.2. 403
Fig. 10 Gende gap in ea nings accumula ed by midli e by numbe and iming o child en, and educa ional a ainmen in a Finland b Sweden.
Ea nings include employmen -based bene i s

705Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
Budig, M. J., Mis a, J., & Boeckmann, I. (2016). Wo k– amily policy
ade-o s o mo he s? Unpacking he c oss-na ional a ia ion in
mo he hood ea nings penal ies. Wo k and Occupa ions, 43(2),
119–177. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 07308 88415 615385
Byg en, M., & Gähle , M. (2012). Family o ma ion and men’s and
women’s a ainmen o wo kplace au ho i y. Social Fo ces, 90(3),
795–816. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1093/ s / so 008
Can alini, S., Hä könen, J., & Dahlbe g, J. (2017). Does pos poning Pay
O ? Timing o pa en hood, ea nings ajec o ies, and ea nings
accumula ion in Sweden. S ockholm Resea ch Repo s in Demog-
aphy. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 17045/ s hlm uni. 54846 82. 1
Cools, S., & S øm, M. (2016). Pa en hood wage penal ies in a double
income socie y. Re iew o Economics o he Household, 14(2),
391–416. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s11150- 014- 9244-y
Cuk owska-To zewska, E., & Ma ysiak, A. (2020). The mo he hood
wage penal y: A me a-analysis. Social Science Resea ch, 88–89,
102416. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. ss es ea ch. 2020. 102416
Daly, M., & Fe agina, E. (2018). Family policy in high-income coun ies:
Fi e decades o de elopmen . Jou nal o Eu opean Social Policy,
28(3), 255–270. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 09589 28717 735060
Da ies, H., Joshi, H., & Pe onaci, R. (2000). Fo gone income and
mo he hood: Wha do ecen B i ish da a ell us? Popula ion
S udies, 54(3), 293–305. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 71377 9094
de Cas o Gal ao, J. (2022). Gende inequali y in li e ime ea nings.
Social Fo ces, 101(4), 1772–1802. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1093/ s /
soac0 60
DiP e e, T. A., & Ei ich, G. M. (2006). Cumula i e ad an age as a
mechanism o inequali y: A e iew o heo e ical and empi ical
de elopmen s. Annual Re iew o Sociology, 32, 271–297. h ps://
doi. o g/ 10. 1146/ annu e . soc. 32. 061604. 123127
Do en, C. (2019). Which mo he s pay a highe p ice? Educa ion di -
e ences in mo he hood wage penal ies by pa i y and e ili y
iming. Sociological Science, 6, 684–709.
Dudel, C., & Klüsene , S. (2021). Male– emale e ili y di e en ials
ac oss 17 high-income coun ies: Insigh s om a new da a
esou ce. Eu opean Jou nal o Popula ion, 37(2), 417–441.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s10680- 020- 09575-9
Du ande , A.-Z., Eydal, G. B., B and h, B., Gíslason, I. V., Lammi-
Taskula, J., & Ros gaa d, T. (2019). Gende equali y: Pa en al
lea e design and e alua ing i s e ec s on a he s’ pa icipa ion. In
P. Moss, A.-Z. Du ande , & A. Koslowski (Eds.), Pa en al lea e
and beyond (pp. 187–204). UK: Policy P ess.
Du ande , A.-Z., Mussino, E., & Te ola, J. (2021). Simila nego ia-
ions o e childca e? A compa a i e s udy o a he s’ pa en al
lea e use in Finland and Sweden. Socie ies, 11(3), 67. h ps://
doi. o g/ 10. 3390/ soc11 030067
Du ande , A.-Z., & Lammi-Taskula, J. (2011). Pa en al lea e, childca e
and gende equali y in he No dic coun ies. In I. Gíslason & G.
B. Eydal (Eds.), No dic Council o Minis e s (pp. 29–62).
Ellingsæ e , A. L., & Lei a, A. (Eds.). (2006). Poli icising Pa en hood
in Scandina ia: Gende Rela ions in Wel a e S a es. UK: Policy
P ess.
Ellingsæ e , A. L. (2014). No dic ea ne -ca e models—why s abili y
and ins abili y? Jou nal o Social Policy, 43(3), 555–574. h ps://
doi. o g/ 10. 1017/ S0047 27941 40002 1X
E landsson, A. (2017). Child home ca e allowance and he ansi ion
o second-and hi d-o de bi hs in Finland. Popula ion Resea ch
and Policy Re iew, 36(4), 607–630. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/
s11113- 017- 9437-1
Esping-Ande sen, G. (1990). The Th ee Wo lds o Wel a e Capi alism.
P ince on Uni e si y P ess.
Esping-Ande sen, G. (2009). Incomple e Re olu ion: Adap ing Wel a e
S a es o Women’s New Roles. Poli y P ess.
Esping-Ande sen, G., & Billa i, F. C. (2015). Re- heo izing amily
demog aphics. Popula ion and De elopmen Re iew, 41(1),
1–31. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1111/j. 1728- 4457. 2015. 00024.x
Eu opean Ins i u e o Gende Equali y. (2017). Gende Equali y Index
2017 - Measu ing gende equali y in he Eu opean Union 2005-
2015. Eu opean Ins i u e o Gende Equali y. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10.
2839/ 251500
Eu os a . (2023b). Pa - ime employmen as a pe cen age o he
o al employmen , by sex and age (%) [LFSQ_EPPGA__cus-
om_6361315]. h ps:// ec. eu opa. eu/ eu os a / da ab owse /,
accessed 25.5.2023.
Eu os a . (2023a). Eu o/na ional cu ency exchange a es [TEIMF200].
Eu os a . h ps:// ec. eu opa. eu/ eu os a / da ab owse /, accessed
3.3.2023.
Eu os a . (2023c). Pu chasing powe pa i ies (PPPs), p ice le el indi-
ces and eal expendi u es o ESA 2010 agg ega es [PRC_PPP_
IND__cus om_5154766]. Eu os a . h ps:// ec. eu opa. eu/ eu os a /
da ab owse /, accessed 3.3.2023.
E e sson, M., & Du ande , A.-Z. (2011). Pa en al lea e—possibil-
i y o ap? Does amily lea e leng h e ec Swedish women’s
labou ma ke oppo uni ies? Eu opean Sociological Re iew,
27(4), 435–450. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1093/ es / jcq018
Eydal, G. B., & Ros gaa d, T. (2011). Gende equali y e isi ed–
changes in No dic childca e policies in he 2000s. Social Policy
& Adminis a ion, 45(2), 161–179. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1111/j.
1467- 9515. 2010. 00762.x
Fasang, A. E., And ade, S. B., Bedük, S., Buyukkececi, Z., & Ka hula,
A. (2024). Li es in wel a e s a es: Li e cou ses, ea nings accu-
mula ion, and ela i e li ing s anda ds in i e Eu opean coun-
ies. Ame ican Jou nal o Sociology. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1086/
730851
Fe agina, E. (2019). Does amily policy in luence women’s employ-
men ?: Re iewing he e idence in he ield. Poli ical S udies
Re iew, 17(1), 65–80. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 14789 29917
736438
Fe agina, E., & Seeleib-Kaise , M. (2015). De e minan s o a silen
( ) e olu ion: Unde s anding he expansion o amily policy in
ich OECD coun ies. Social Poli ics: In e na ional S udies in
Gende , S a e & Socie y, 22(1), 1–37. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1093/
sp/ jxu027
F i zell, J., Bäckman, O., & Ri akallio, V.-M. (2012). Income ine-
quali y and po e y: do he No dic coun ies s ill cons i u e a
amily o hei own? In J. K is , J. F i zell, B. H inden, & O.
Kangas (Eds.), Changing social equali y: The No dic wel a e
model in he 21s cen u y (pp. 165–186). UK: B is ol Uni e -
si y P ess, Policy P ess.
Glaubi z, R., Ha nack-Ebe , A., & We e , M. (2022). The gende
gap in li e ime ea nings: The ole o pa en hood. DIW Be lin
Discussion Pape , . h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 2139/ ss n. 40714 16
Goldscheide , F., Be nha d , E., & Lappegå d, T. (2015). The gen-
de e olu ion: A amewo k o unde s anding changing am-
ily and demog aphic beha io . Popula ion and De elopmen
Re iew, 41(2), 207–239. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1111/j. 1728- 4457.
2015. 00045.x
G ødem, A. S. (2014). A e iew o amily demog aphics and amily
policies in he No dic coun ies. Bal ic Jou nal o Poli ical
Science, 3(50), 66. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 00016 99316 660595
G önlund, A., Halldén, K., & Magnusson, C. (2017). A Scandina-
ian success s o y? Women’s labou ma ke ou comes in Den-
ma k, Finland. No way and Sweden. Ac a Sociologica, 60(2),
97–119. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 00016 99316 660595
G ube , J., Kosonen, T., & Hu unen, K. (2023). Paying moms o
s ay home: Sho and long un e ec s on pa en s and child en.
Na ional Bu eau o Economic Resea ch Wo king Pape Se ies,
30931. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 3386/ w30931
Hälls en, M., & Yaish, M. (2022). In e gene a ional educa ional
mobili y and li e cou se economic ajec o ies in a social dem-
oc a ic wel a e s a e. Eu opean Sociological Re iew, 38(4),
507–526. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1093/ es / jcab0 54
706 Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
Hä könen, J. (2014). Di o ce: T ends, pa e ns, causes, and con-
sequences. In J. T eas, J. Sco , & M. Richa ds (Eds.), The
Wiley Blackwell companion o he sociology o amilies (pp.
303–322). NJ: John Wiley & Sons L d.
Heckhausen, J., & Buchmann, M. (2019). A mul i-disciplina y model
o li e-cou se canaliza ion and agency. Ad ances in Li e Cou se
Resea ch, 41, 100246. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. alc . 2018. 09.
002
Hegewisch, A., & Go nick, J. C. (2013). The impac o wo k- amily
policies on women’s employmen : a e iew o esea ch om
OECD coun ies. Wo k and Family Policy. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10.
1080/ 13668 803. 2011. 571395
Hells and, J., Nisén, J., Mi anda, V., Fallesen, P., Domme mu h, L.,
& My skylä, M. (2021). No jus la e , bu ewe : No el ends
in coho e ili y in he No dic coun ies. Demog aphy, 58(4),
1373–1399. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1215/ 00703 370- 93736 18
He , J. L. (2016). Measu ing he e ec o he iming o i s bi h on
wages. Jou nal o Popula ion Economics, 29, 39–72. h ps:// doi.
o g/ 10. 1007/ s00148- 015- 0554-z
Hiilamo, H., & Kangas, O. (2009). T ap o women o eedom o
choose? The s uggle o e cash o child ca e schemes in Finland
and Sweden. Jou nal o Social Policy, 38(3), 457–475. h ps://
doi. o g/ 10. 1017/ S0047 27940 90030 67
Hook, J. L., Li, M., Paek, E., & Co e , B. (2022). Na ional wo k–
amily policies and he occupa ional seg ega ion o women and
mo he s in Eu opean coun ies, 1999–2016. Eu opean Sociologi-
cal Re iew, 39(2), 280–300. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1093/ es / jcac0 46
Huinink, J., & Kohli, M. (2014). A li e-cou se app oach o e ili y.
Demog aphic Resea ch, 30, 1293–1326.
Human Fe ili y Da abase. (2022). Human Fe ili y Da abase. www.
human e i li y. o g/ com. 7.4.2022. Max Planck Ins i u e o
Demog aphic Resea ch (Ge many) and Vienna Ins i u e o
Demog aphy (Wi gens ein Cen e, Aus ia).
ILO. (2016). Non-s anda d employmen a ound he wo ld: Unde s and-
ing challenges, shaping p ospec s. In e na ional Labou O ice.
h p:// hdl. oced. edu. au/ 10707/ 417360
Jalo aa a, M., & Fasang, A. E. (2020). Family li e cou ses, gende ,
and mid-li e ea nings. Eu opean Sociological Re iew, 36(2),
159–178. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1093/ es / jcz057
Jalo aa a, M., & Mie inen, A. (2013). Does his paycheck also ma e ?
The socioeconomic esou ces o co- esiden ial pa ne s and en y
in o pa en hood in Finland. Demog aphic Resea ch, 28, 881–916.
Jalo aa a, M., Neye , G., Ande sson, G., Dahlbe g, J., Domme mu h,
L., Fallesen, P., & Lappegå d, T. (2019). Educa ion, gende ,
and coho e ili y in he No dic coun ies. Eu opean Jou -
nal o Popula ion, 35(3), 563–586. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/
s10680- 018- 9492-2
Jalo aa a, M., Ande sson, L., & Mie inen, A. (2022). Pa i y dispa -
i y: Educa ional di e ences in No dic e ili y ac oss pa i ies
and numbe o ep oduc i e pa ne s. Popula ion S udies, 76(1),
119–136. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 00324 728. 2021. 18875 06
Kim, C., Tambo ini, C. R., & Sakamo o, A. (2015). Field o s udy in
college and li e ime ea nings in he Uni ed S a es. Sociology o
Educa ion, 88(4), 320–339. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 00380 40715
602132
Kle en, H., Landais, C., Posch, J., S einhaue , A., & Zweimülle , J.
(2019a). Child penal ies ac oss coun ies: E idence and explana-
ions. AEA Pape s and P oceedings, 109, 122–126. h ps:// doi.
o g/ 10. 1257/ pandp. 20191 078
Kle en, H., Landais, C., & Søgaa d, J. E. (2019b). Child en and gen-
de inequali y: E idence om Denma k. Ame ican Economic
Jou nal: Applied Economics, 11(4), 181–209. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10.
1257/ pandp. 20191 078
Kolk, M. (2022). The ela ionship be ween li e-cou se accumula ed
income and childbea ing o Swedish men and women bo n
1940–70. Popula ion S udies. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 00324
728. 2022. 21345 78
Ko pi, W. (2000). Faces o inequali y: Gende , class, and pa e ns o
inequali ies in di e en ypes o wel a e s a es. Social Poli ics:
In e na ional S udies in Gende , S a e & Socie y, 7(2), 127–191.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1093/ sp/7. 2. 127
Ko pi, W., Fe a ini, T., & Englund, S. (2013). Women’s oppo uni-
ies unde di e en amily policy cons ella ions: Gende , class,
and inequali y adeo s in wes e n coun ies e-examined. Social
Poli ics, 20(1), 1–40. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1093/ sp/ jxs028
Kosken uo, K. (2016). Pe he apaiden aiku us eläkkeeseen
1980-lu ul a 2000-lu ulle [Impac o amily lea es on pen-
sion om he 1980s o he 2000s]. In A. Haa aja, I. Ai io, M.
Saa ikallio-To p, & M. Valas e (Eds.), Laulu 573 566 Pe hees ä.
Lapsipe hee ja Pe hepoli iikka 2000-lu ulla [A Song o ... Fami-
lies. Families wi h Child en and Family Policies in he 2000s]
(pp. 116–136). Kela.
K eyen eld, M., & Ande sson, G. (2014). Socioeconomic di e ences in
he unemploymen and e ili y nexus: E idence om Denma k
and Ge many. Ad ances in Li e Cou se Resea ch, 21, 59–73.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. alc . 2014. 01. 007
Kui o, K., Salonen, J., & Helmdag, J. (2019). Gende inequali ies in
ea ly ca ee ajec o ies and pa en al lea es: E idence om a
No dic wel a e s a e. Social Sciences, 8(9), 253.
Kui alainen, S., Ni alainen, S., Jä ne el , N., & Kui o, K. (2020).
Leng h o wo king li e and pension income: Empi ical e idence
on gende and socioeconomic di e ences om Finland. Jou nal
o Pension Economics & Finance, 19(1), 126–146. h ps:// doi.
o g/ 10. 1017/ S1474 74721 80002 15
Leung, M. Y. M., G oes, F., & San aeulalia-Llopis, R. (2016). The
ela ionship be ween age a i s bi h and mo he ’s li e ime ea n-
ings: E idence om Danish da a. PLoS ONE, 11(1), e0146989.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1371/ jou n al. pone. 01469 89
Ligh , A., & U e a, M. (1995). Ea ly-ca ee wo k expe ience and
gende wage di e en ials. Jou nal o Labo Economics, 13(1),
121–154. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1086/ 298370
Lo en zen, T., Bäckman, O., Ilmakunnas, I., & Kauppinen, T. (2019).
Pa hways o adul hood: Sequences in he school- o-wo k ansi-
ion in Finland, No way and Sweden. Social Indica o s Resea ch,
141, 1285–1305. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s11205- 018- 1877-4
Lundbo g, P., Plug, E., & Rasmussen, A. W. (2017). Can women
ha e child en and a ca ee ? IV e idence om IVF ea men s.
Ame ican Economic Re iew, 107(6), 1611–1637. h ps:// doi.
o g/ 10. 1257/ ae . 20141 467
Mandel, H., & Semyono , M. (2005). Family policies, wage s uc-
u es, and gende gaps: Sou ces o ea nings inequali y in 20
coun ies. Ame ican Sociological Re iew, 70(6), 949–967.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 00031 22405 07000 604
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.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1086/ 499912
McDonald, P. (2000). Gende equi y in heo ies o e ili y ansi ion.
Popula ion and De elopmen Re iew, 26(3), 427–439. h ps://
doi. o g/ 10. 1111/j. 1728- 4457. 2000. 00427.x
Mie inen, A., & Jalo aa a, M. (2020). Unemploymen delays i s
bi h bu no o all. Li e s age and educa ional di e ences in
he e ec s o employmen unce ain y on i s bi hs. Ad ances
in Li e Cou se Resea ch, 43, 100320. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j.
alc . 2019. 100320
Milkie, M. A. (2011). Social and cul u al esou ces o and con-
s ain s on new mo he s’ ma iages. Jou nal o Ma iage and
Family, 73(1), 18–22.
Mille , A. R. (2011). The e ec s o mo he hood iming on ca ee
pa h. Jou nal o Popula ion Economics, 24, 1071–1100.
h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s00148- 009- 0296-x
707Jou nal o Family and Economic Issues (2025) 46:685–707
Mince , J., & O ek, H. (1982). In e up ed wo k ca ee s: Dep e-
cia ion and es o a ion o human capi al. Jou nal o Human
Resou ces, 7(1), 3–24.
Mince , J., & Polachek, S. (1974). Family in es men s in human
capi al: Ea nings o women. Jou nal o Poli ical Economy,
82, S76–S108.
Mussino, E., Te ola, J., & Du ande , A.-Z. (2019). Decomposing
he de e minan s o a he s’ pa en al lea e use: E idence om
mig a ion be ween Finland and Sweden. Jou nal o Eu opean
Social Policy, 29(2), 197–212. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 09589
28718 792129
Neye , G., & Ande sson, G. (2008). Consequences o amily poli-
cies on childbea ing beha io : E ec s o a i ac s? Popula ion
and De elopmen Re iew, 34(4), 699–724. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10.
1111/j. 1728- 4457. 2008. 00246.x
Neye , G., Lappegå d, T., & Vignoli, D. (2013). Gende equali y and
e ili y: Which equali y ma e s? Eu opean Jou nal o Popula-
ion, 29, 245–272. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s10680- 013- 9292-7
Nisén, J., Ma ikainen, P., Sil en oinen, K., & My skylä, M.
(2014). Age-speci ic e ili y by educa ional le el in he Finn-
ish male coho bo n 1940–1950. Demog aphic Resea ch, 31,
119–136.
Nisén, J., Bijlsma, M. J., Ma ikainen, P., Wilson, B., & My skylä,
M. (2022). The gende ed impac s o delayed pa en hood: A
dynamic analysis o young adul hood. Ad ances in Li e Cou se
Resea ch, 53, 100496. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. alc . 2022.
100496
NOSOSCO. (2017). Social P o ec ion in he No dic Coun ies.
Scope, Expendi u e and Financing. Social P o ec ion in he
No dic Coun ies 2015/2016. No dic Social S a is ical Com-
mi ee (NOSOSCO). 63:2017. h ps:// nhws a . o g/.
O’B ien, M., & Wall, K. (2017). Compa a i e Pe spec i es on Wo k-
Li e Balance and Gende Equali y: Fa he s on Lea e Alone.
Cham: Sp inge Na u e.
OECD. (2018). OECD Economic Su eys: Finland 2018. OECD
Publishing h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1787/ eco_ su e ys- in- 2018- en
OECD. (2019). Employmen a e (indica o ). h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1787/
1de68 a9b- en, accessed 1.8.2019.
OECD. (2023). Joining Fo ces o Gende Equali y. h ps:// doi. o g/
10. 1787/ 67d48 024- en
Óla sson, S., Daly, M., Kangas, O., & Palme, J. (Eds.). (2019). Wel a e
and he G ea Recession: A Compa a i e S udy. Ox o d: Ox o d
Uni e si y P ess.
Oli e i, C., & Pe ongolo, B. (2017). The economic consequences o
amily policies: Lessons om a cen u y o legisla ion in high-
income coun ies. Jou nal o Economic Pe spec i es, 31(1),
205–230. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1257/ jep. 31.1. 205
OSF. (2023). Consume P ice Index. O icial S a is ics Finland (OSF).;
S a is ics Finland. h ps:// s a . i/ en/ s a i s ics/ khi. h ps:// s a . i/ en/
s a i s ics/ khi, accessed 3.3.2023.
OSF. (2024). To al Fe ili y Ra e Lowes in Measu ing His o y in 2022.
Popula ion, 2022 O icial S a is ics o Finland (OSF) S a is ics
Finland h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1111/ spol. 12510
Ös e backa, E., & Räsänen, T. (2022). Back o wo k o s ay a home?
Family policies and ma e nal employmen in Finland. Jou nal
o Popula ion Economics, 35(3), 1071–1101. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10.
1007/ s00148- 021- 00843-4
Pa olin, Z., & VanHeu elen, T. (2023). The cumula i e ad an age
o a unionized ca ee o li e ime ea nings. ILR Re iew, 76(2),
434–460. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 00197 93922 11292 61
Powell, M., Yö ük, E., & Ba gu, A. (2020). Thi y yea s o he h ee
wo lds o wel a e capi alism A e iew o e iews. Social Policy
& Adminis a ion, 54(1), 60–87.
Rønsen, M., & Sunds öm, M. (2002). Family policy and a e -bi h
employmen among new mo he s – A compa ison o Finland,
No way and Sweden. Eu opean Jou nal o Popula ion, 18(2),
121–152. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1023/A: 10155 32305 179
Ruel, E., & Hause , R. M. (2012). Explaining he gende weal h
gap. Demog aphy, 50(4), 1155–1176. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/
s13524- 012- 0182-0
Sigle-Rush on, W., & Wald ogel, J. (2007). Mo he hood and women’s
ea nings in Anglo-Ame ican, Con inen al Eu opean, and No dic
coun ies. Feminis Economics, 13(2), 55–91. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10.
1080/ 13545 70060 11848 49
Sipila, J., Repo, K., & Rissanen, T. (Eds.). (2010). Cash o child-
ca e: The consequences o ca ing mo he s. UK: Edwa d Elga
Publishing.
S a is a. (2022). A e age Age o Women a he Bi h o he Fi s Child
in he No dic Coun ies om 2010 o 2020. No dic S a is ics
Da abase. www. s a i s a. com/ s a i s ics/ 12977 99/ a e a ge- age-
women- bi h- i s - child- no dic- coun ies/, accessed 25.5.2023.
Tambo ini, C. R., Kim, C., & Sakamo o, A. (2015). Educa ion and
li e ime ea nings in he Uni ed S a es. Demog aphy, 52(4), 1383–
1407. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s13524- 015- 0407-0
T oske, K. R., & Voicu, A. (2013). The e ec o he iming and spac-
ing o bi hs on he le el o labo ma ke in ol emen o ma ied
women. Empi ical Economics, 45, 483–521. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10.
1007/ s00181- 012- 0620-2
Vika , A. (2004). Women’s labo o ce a achmen and childbea ing in
Finland. Demog aphic Resea ch, 3, 177–212. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10.
4054/ DemRes. 2004. S3.8
Publishe 's No e Sp inge Na u e emains neu al wi h ega d o
ju isdic ional claims in published maps and ins i u ional a ilia ions.