Genderwise project
Final Report

Introduction

Policy context and Sub-themes

Peer Review Exchange Workshops

Examples of Local Actions

Conclusions and recommendations

Return to Genderwise Home

Genderwise

Policy Context and Sub-themes

General Policy Context

Sub-themes:
Socialisation and education
Gender equality and the workplace
Sharing domestic responsibilities: the role of men

General Policy Context

There are a number of contextual factors that underpin the policy context for this project.

Equality is a relationship between people. Gender equality is not an issue that only concerns women. It requires active commitments by men, and partnerships between women and men. While different political movements have placed gender equality on the agendas of international and national fora, it is only relatively recently that the issue of the active involvement of men and boys in achieving gender equality has been raised. Whilst there has been a growth in the attention given to the critical role men and boys can play in the achievement of gender equality, the achievement of gender equality is still to a large extent considered a women's issue. In other words, there is still a considerable policy "impact lag" in terms of action.

The growing interest in the role of men and boys also has occurred as a result of the shift in the work for gender equality from a focus on advancing women's status to a focus on gender relations, i.e. the relations between women and men. The gender approach allows for clarification of the roles commonly associated with being male or female in public and in private life, and provides a basis for identifying differences and inequalities between women and men in responsibilities assigned, activities undertaken, access to and control over resources as well as decision-making opportunities. A better understanding of gender roles and related structural inequalities increases opportunities for policy measures and other actions aimed at overcoming such inequalities. This shift from a focus on women to the perspective of gender relations has created the opportunity to give increased attention to men and boys. Over the last decade a stronger focus has developed on the positive role men and boys can and do play in promoting women's empowerment in the home, the community, the labour market and the workplace. The increasing attention given to the role of men and boys by Member States, international bodies such as the United Nations, research institutes and civil society reflects this shift in terms of the policy agenda. This trend, for example, is also reflected in the National Action Plans for Employment and Social Inclusion of Member States as well as the EU life-long learning strategy and work with young people. It is now more widely recognized that a better understanding of gender roles and relations, and related structural inequalities, increases opportunities for effective policy measures and actions for overcoming inequalities. The role of men and boys in challenging and changing unequal power relations is critical.

Changing patterns of production and reproduction are also indicative of changes in gender relations which challenge traditional images and expectations associated with men's - as well as women's - roles, such as those of breadwinner, care giver, or head of household. These developments increasingly call for a re-assessment of the roles and responsibilities of women and men, of stereotypical and traditional gender roles, and of existing power relations between women and men. Increased emphasis is also placed on men and women working together towards gender equality.

Full engagement of men and boys in achieving gender equality requires much greater attention to gender stereotypes and expectations about men's roles and responsibilities, and how these expectations influence male behaviour. Such stereotypes continue to place greater emphasis, as well as greater value, on the role of men and boys in public life and in the work place, as opposed to women's role in unpaid family labour, care giving and community work.

Men's involvement in gender equality and work with men and boys is not however new. There is a large body of research about men's gender identities and practices, masculinities, social relations and related matters. Academic journals have been founded for specialized research on men and masculinities, many research conferences have been held, and there is a rapidly growing body of international literature. Men's support for gender equality has taken a variety of forms including intellectual and public advocacy, organizational and political alliances, and a variety of educational programmes for young men.

In addition, there has been a proliferation of projects and programmes related to working with men and boys implemented by institutions, ranging from large international development organizations to small community-based groups. Many of these projects focus on improving sexual and reproductive health, combating HIV/AIDS, reducing gender-based violence, and overcoming poverty and social exclusion. In many instances these diverse programmes and approaches to men's involvement are conceptually grounded in gender-equitable, pro-poor and/or rights based approaches to development. These conceptual frameworks help make clear the linkages between the different thematic areas of work with men - such as the linkages with violence, structural inequalities (including those based upon race, class, physical ability and age), the spread of HIV/AIDS and poverty. Projects working with men and boys are seen not only as an end in themselves, but as a strategic way to achieve gender equality, reduce poverty, and ensure human rights.

What emerges from the research and results of projects is that men feel increasingly committed to their families and are increasingly emotionally involved in their children. At the same time, research into the division of paid and unpaid labour indicates that it is difficult for large groups of men to realise their wishes and live up to their ideals. Two clusters of theories have served to explain this contradiction between preference and reality. One cluster of theories consists of the new home economics or rational choice theories, the other cluster of theories can be summarised under the header of gender identity theories.

The so-called rational choice theories are originally based on the new home economics model. In this household production model, someone's market productivity and home productivity are compared over the life cycle. In the middle stage of life, the market productivity and earning capacity reach their peak, and , consequently, it is most rational to participate on the labour market as much as possible during that phase. The arrival of children poses a problem, because as a consequence time spent on housekeeping and family tasks (the home productivity) rise as well. The rational choice theorists state that partners running a household together (the family unit) will always opt for the decision that yields the maximum reward for the least effort. The comparative efficiency of each partner will shape the division of market and household labour. Since, on, average , men still have more opportunities on the labour market and higher wages than women, it would be- from a rational point of view- financially disadvantageous for men to work less and for women to work more. Nevertheless, rational choice theories cannot explain the asymmetric division of household labour completely. If these theories were right, the division of household labour should be symmetrical within households where men and women have the same opportunities on the labour market. It turns out that this is not the case. Even in households where men and women have the same opportunities on the labour market and regarding earning capacities, an asymmetric division of labour exists.

Gender identity theories show that "choices" are made in the direction opposite from the ones that the household economics theories would justify. Research in fact shows that men perform even fewer tasks within the household if their wives reach a higher income level and financial status. Gender identity theories suggest that men with well earning wives have difficulty to maintain their masculine image, and, as a result they want to resist changes that challenge their male gender identity. Work is assumed to be a major basis of masculine identity. Masculinity is challenged when men enter the home in order to take on the main responsibility for a child. Care giving, it is suggested, is problematic, because care lacks the symbolic value of paid labour, which is associated with status, power and income.

These theories highlight the persistence of a number of obstacles. These include persistent gender stereotyping which had led to insufficient encouragement for men to reconcile professional and family responsibilities, and insufficient sharing of tasks and responsibilities by men for care giving within families, households and communities. Attention therefore needs to be focused on the positive role of men as partners and allies in building a more gender responsive and just society.

To realize men's interests in change, a majority of men and boys must be persuaded that the benefits under the current gender order (the current system of gender relations in society) are less valuable than many now think - or that they come at too high a cost. Moving towards gender equality requires a basic shift from a gender consciousness built on dichotomy and privilege to a gender consciousness built on diversity and reciprocity. There are many positive trends in this direction, and many men who support them.

In the world of work and sharing domestic chores the potential policy options for changing men's involvement in gender relations are crystallising around the issues of work-life balance, the impact of parenthood on employment, the rights of fathers after the birth of a child and the return of former leave-takers into the labour market. The most comprehensive policy measures on these issues have been implemented in Northern European countries, especially in Sweden. As Holter underlines: "The Nordic 'experiment' has shown that a majority of men can change their practice when circumstances are favourable. When reforms or support policies are well-designed and targeted towards an ongoing cultural process of change, men's active support for gender-equal status increases." (Holter, 2003:126). From this perspective, the best policy option seems to be the adaptation of the key elements of the North European practice.

MacInnes (2006) lists the following objectives of the Nordic reconciliation (work-life balance or family-friendly) policies:

• reduction of long working hours incompatible with parenting and family life;
• to facilitate different leave schemes and arrangements;
• to increase labour supply through provision of 'flexible' working time arrangements and childcare services;
• to overcome gender segregation of labour market and unequal share of domestic labour;
• to promote a more equal sharing of paid and unpaid work;
• to avoid fiscal consequences of population ageing by supporting fertility sustaining family life.

However, Reingardiene and Tereskinas (2006) underline that the structures of the welfare state and the institutionalised policies of social protection play key roles among the policies. The three main policies concern:

• the provision of public care infrastructures by state;
• the provision of parental leave arrangements;
• the development of new patterns of working time.

First, a good infrastructure of public day care is a basic (necessary) factor for equality success in the Nordic countries. Second, the frame of parental leave as an individual or non-transferable entitlement gives more incentive for men to opt for such leave. In addition, flexibility in the take-up of parental leave (maternity leave and paternity leave) offer parents the opportunity to take up leave in turns. Third, when employers are aware of work-life balance problems - the intensification of the workload versus the needs of children and family life - the supporting policies are not dependent only upon individual organisational benevolence, but they are also perceived as a strategic choice promoting long-term effectiveness.

Top

Sub-themes:

socialisation and education

There are a multitude of voices claiming that socialisation, and consequently education, are the keys to bridging this gap separating formal equality from real equality between women and men in welfare societies. To date, the vast majority of work-family reconciliation policies have been limited to facilitating women's entry into the job market, and to a lesser extent, to encouraging men to participate more actively in the household realm. However, they have done this without bearing in mind the differentiating effects of the socialisation process. Emphasising this process is crucial to ensuring greater involvement by men in household chores and care of dependent persons. Some conceptual points are:

• The gender perspective recalls that inequalities between men and women are the result of a different socialisation process based on gender and thus that they do not arise from innate biological differences.
• From the gender perspective, primary socialisation is when individuals acquire the basic elements of their gender identity, while secondary socialisation confirms and legitimises the adoption of that identity and adherence to pre-established gender roles (Brullet, 1996).
• Gender roles and stereotypes are the pillars of gender socialisation. Through them, boys and girls are assigned the norms, roles, expectations and social spaces for male and female identity.
• The collective patriarchal consciousness attributes qualities and attributes to men and women that are inherent to their sex and that entail different ways of living and thinking in their everyday lives. As a result, from an intergenerational standpoint, socialisation for production is a male characteristic and socialisation for reproduction is the backbone of female life.

Several studies show how currently, behaviour patterns are changing more quickly amongst girls than boys. Girls have broader, more diverse and contradictory life plans than boys, while for boys, their life plans remain focused almost exclusively on full availability for work (Tarrés, 2002). Females' dual adherence, both productive and reproductive, will lead them to live in a permanent system of twofold presence that they could scarcely imagine.

Amongst the young generations, boys and girls share the collective consciousness of equal opportunities. Equal access to university degrees thus makes them believe this. However, once they enter adulthood, many women discover the hidden facet of this notion: the dual adherence, both productive and reproductive, which will condition their entire lifetime and do so in both their workplace and their personal lives.

First, they will come upon not formal yet real difficulties when choosing certain professional options. Sexist discrimination in school does not result in lower educational attainment, rather in a devaluation of professional options. Secondly, when they acquire affective stability, they will most likely take on greater responsibilities for domestic work and care work than their partners.

One of the concepts that best explains this difference in female and male identity is the hidden curriculum. This term refers to the entire set of norms, attitudes, expectations, beliefs and practices that are unconsciously taught in institutions and in the hegemonic culture (Santos Guerra, 1996). It is a mechanism that explains the lack of awareness as to the transmission of the patriarchal culture's implicit norms and values. Beyond content, it highlights the importance of social relations as a factor explaining the process through which gender is socially constructed. The consequences of this hidden curriculum results in the different ways boys and girls organise experience, structure spaces, articulate time, establish relations and perform tasks, differences which condition their life plans.

Given the characteristics of this hidden curriculum, it should be understood that the primary socialising agents are not aware of it; consequently, they do not have the resources and training needed to combat gender stereotypes and roles. Or, if they are already aware of it, they can generate tension with the norms and values transmitted by other agents: contradictions between what is taught at home and what is seen on the television, or between what is learned at school and what grandparents tell. So, if we want to intervene in this frame it is necessary, firstly, to know the characteristics of each socialisation agents and, secondly, to know their main resources.

The socialisation agents

The family realm

It is where the socialisation process begins. The attitudes of parents can mediate the traditional gender roles in their children's construction of identity. Often families have placed their hopes for the equality of their sons and daughters in the hands of formal education and have forgotten about the informal upbringing that takes place inside the home (Valiente, 1997). Along these lines, many different studies underscore the importance of family lifestyle over the structural variables that the mother and father define. For example, it appears that relations with one's own gender, father with son and mother with daughter, reinforces roles, while relations with the opposite sex can contribute to diminishing stereotypes. For this reason, we must bear in mind the influence of the following:

• Behaviours and responsibilities that are taken on by and attributed to the different members of the household.
• Different treatment of children according to their sex, conveyed through games, clothing, activities and chores assigned to them.
• Intergenerational relations through which the traditional gender roles and stereotypes are reproduced.
• The language used to communicate within the household.
• The use and distribution of household space.

The educational realm

It can be regarded as one of the most egalitarian realms of socialisation. However, it should be borne in mind that it still values and considers important certain knowledge and wisdom that are rooted in an androcentric tradition. Inasmuch as this is true, gender roles and stereotypes are conveyed and consolidated. Experts remind us that beyond the statistical data that highlight the increasing presence of women in all university degree programmes, it is important to remember that discrimination has changed form but not content (Subirats, 1999; Solsona, 2002). Currently, sexism is not manifested in overall access to education nor in academic performance, rather more subtly through the hidden curriculum. Along these lines, it should be borne in mind that:

• Coeducation schools are not educating schools; an explicit bread is needed with identifying school content and maleness.
• The influence of the presence and absence of men and women teachers according to the educational level and subjects.
• The preponderance of the male model and androcentric contents in school subjects.
• The language used to communicate inside the classroom.
• The use and distribution of school space.
• The organisation and dynamisation of schools.
• The underlying values that are conveyed in games and extracurricular activities.

Informal education

It refers to non-academic education in values and other knowledge offered and received outside school. It is usually transmitted through entities, associations and organisations that provide free-time activities, sports or training for children. One of the clearest examples of the importance of informal education in the reproduction of gender roles and stereotypes is the segregation found in sports. As is obvious, this realm is not impervious to the hidden curriculum, and here the same factors should be borne in mind as in the realm of education.

The media

It is one of the main socialisation institutions in western society as it plays a key role in creating, modifying and eliminating values and ways of thinking and living. For this reason, it must be taken into account if we wish to influence the reproduction of sexist roles and stereotypes. Many different studies prove its influence in the process of child socialisation and lambaste advertising as one of the realms where sexism is most often conveyed (Fernández, 2001). Some factors to bear in mind along these lines are:

• The use of stereotyped language.
• The presence and absence of stereotyped images of women, along with violent and pornographic images.
• Gender sensitivity in programming policies.
• The coverage of women in the news.
• The number of women working in the communications sector, the positions they hold in terms of decision-making.
• Women's access to the new information and communication technologies.

Top

Gender Equality in the Workplace

In this part basic indicators of gender inequality in the world of work are presented. Comparable datasets are available regarding unemployment rates, employment rates, the ratio of part-time employment (as a % of total employment), the share of female managers in total managers and the gender pay gap.

Unemployment in the EU25

In general, unemployment rate of women in the European Union (EU-25 countries) is 2%-points higher than the unemployment rate of men (9.6% against 7.6%). However, there are marked inter-country differences: in 4 countries male unemployment rate is higher, in 1 country female and male unemployment rates are the same, while in 20 countries the female unemployment rate is higher.

Possible factors explaining these differences are partly economic, partly cultural ones. A stronger role of business services and traditionally higher labour market participation of women are likely to be the two major explanatory variables. Male unemployment rate is higher in Ireland, Sweden, the United Kingdom and Latvia while female and male unemployment rates are the same in Estonia. An interesting feature: at present, these countries are among the most prosperous ones of the European Union, especially if GDP growth rate is controlled by the level of economic development.

In certain countries ( Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Austria, Slovenia, Hungary, Lithuania, Cyprus) the differences between female and male unemployment rates are rather small ones. These countries are smaller open economies with strong business service sectors and/or extensive public sectors. However, culturally-geographically Cyprus seems to be an outsider: in Southern European countries female unemployment rates are typically higher, mainly due to traditionalist patriarchal family organisation and division of labour. The fact that Cyprus was once part of the British Commonwealth, could explain its seemingly outsider position.

The next group of countries consists of 7 states. Germany, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are the main industrial countries of the present EU in which machinery sectors are especially strong. In these countries female unemployment is markedly higher than male unemployment. The collapse of the light industries (textile, footwear) and the continuing importance of machinery sectors have had different impacts on the unemployment of women and men.

The last group of countries comprises Southern European states ( Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Malta) and Poland. These countries are (or at least had been) following rather traditionalist values: lower female participation and a smaller role of part-time employment are (or were) the typical consequences of these value patterns on the labour market. The period of transformation (i.e. a shift towards less traditionalist, less masculine values) seems to be especially painful for women living in these countries: female unemployment rate is much higher than the male unemployment rate.

Female and male unemployment rates in the European Union (as a % of the labour force, ILO definition, February 2006)

Source: Eurostat

 The difference in female and male unemployment rates has remained stubbornly high: in February 2006 it was 2%-point compared to 2.1%-point in February 2005. The gap is narrowing significantly in Spain, Germany, Cyprus and Slovenia while it is increasing somewhat in the Czech Republic, Italy and Malta. The impacts of sectoral business cycles are evident in this respect: blossoming service activities typically favour female participation while strong machinery sector prefers male participation.

Employment in the EU25

The difference between female and male employment rates is conspicuous in the European Union: while in Q2 2005 the employment rate of women was 56.3%, male employment rate achieved 71.2%. In addition, there is no country in the EU, in which the female employment would be higher. However, cross-country differences are remarkable also in this respect: while in Sweden both female and male employment rate is above 70% (and the difference is only 4%-points), in Malta the above-average male employment (73.5%) is coupled with an extremely low female employment rate (33.6%).

Female and male employment rates in the European Union (Q2 2005)

Source: Eurostat

Grouping the countries we can observe that cultural-social factors bear more influence on the female and male employment rates than economic ones. In 7 countries ( Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Slovenia) the difference between female and male unemployment rate is relatively small (below 10 %-points). These countries are smaller, open economies in which Nordic (i.e. less traditionalist) value patterns dominate. The small difference is mainly a consequence of the high female participation. In addition, active labour market policies and/or the extensive welfare state may also promote the higher labour market inclusion of women. An interesting phenomenon however, is that the smallest employment rate difference is observable in a post-socialist country, namely in Estonia where the markedly above-average female employment (63.5%) is coupled with below-average male employment (66.5%). In other words: we can assume that the less traditionalist, Nordic value orientation of the Estonian society had a strong positive impact on the high female labour market participation and the steady process of economic convergence (measured inter alia, in terms of GDP per capita).

In 12 countries of the European Union the difference between female and male employment rate is between 10 and 20 %-point. Most of the founding members of the EU ( Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands), as well as the United Kingdom, Ireland and Austria are in this group. In addition, the four new member States of Eastern-Central Europe (the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Poland) and, surprisingly, Portugal also registered a 'moderate' (i.e. around the average) difference between female and male employment. The promoted female labour market participation in state socialism might explain the position of the ECE countries, while in the case of Portugal sectoral peculiarities (the high relative importance of textile and footwear industries) and more flexible regulation may partly offset the traditionalist value orientation.

In the remaining six countries of the EU the difference between female and male employment rates is higher than 20%. Not surprisingly, with the exception of Portugal Southern-European countries ( Greece, Spain, Italy, Cyprus and Malta) are in this group; but the high difference between female and male employment in Luxembourg comes as a surprise. Nevertheless, the female employment rate in Cyprus, Luxembourg and Spain is more than 50%, and in Spain we could observe a significant improvement in the last couple of years. On the other hand, the Italian, the Greek and the Maltese female employment rate is markedly below 50%. These figures again underline the utmost importance of value patterns.

Naturally not only gender differences but also total employment levels matter. In Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom and Portugal(!) both female and male employment is markedly above the EU average, while in Italy, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia both are significantly below. While mainly cultural factors determine the differences between female and male employment rates, we can assume that the level of total employment (i.e. both female and male employment) are more dependent upon other factors, such as employment policy measures, labour market regulations, sectoral business cycles and human capital (education and health) factors.

Part-time employment in the EU25

Several leading sociologists and labour market analysts regard part-time employment as a means to combine household (non-paid) and 'gainful' (paid) work. In this approach part-time employment is especially relevant for women who have more domestic work than men. Not surprisingly, almost one-third of European women are in part-time employment (32.6%) while the share of part-time employment among male workers is only 7.1%.

Cross-country differences are remarkable in this respect as well. The Netherlands is an outlier: not only because of the outstanding role of part-time employment among women (75.3%) but also due to the high relative share of male part-time employed (22.6%). Specific labour market regulation has an overwhelming role in that. In most of the older EU members ( Belgium, Denmark, Germany, France, Luxembourg, Austria, Sweden and the United Kingdom), female part-time employment oscillates between 30-45%. In Spain, Italy and Ireland the share of part-time employed among women is roughly 25%, while in Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia and Finland it moves between 10-20%. The lowest ratio of female part-time employment is observable in Greece and most of new EU member States (namely: the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Hungary and Slovakia).

Inter-country comparison of male part-time employment indicates that it is parallel with female part-time employment figures (although part-time employment among men is much less frequent in all of the EU countries). Besides value patterns and labour market regulation features also the general level of well-being matters a lot: in the poorer new EU members income from part-time employment is hardly enough to ensure a decent family (or individual) life.

Female and male employed part-time in the European Union (as a % of total female and male employment, Q2 2005)

Source: Eurostat

Career pattern inequalities in the EU25

Gender inequalities in the workplace can be characterized by different career opportunities. Two commonly used indicators to measure this phenomenon are the share of female managers (as a % of total managers) and the gender pay gap. The gender pay gap is the difference between average earnings of male and female employees.

Share of female managers and gender pay gap in the European Union

Source: Eurostat

In all of the EU countries, the share of female managers is lower than 50%. The ratio is the lowest (below 20%) in the two new EU member Mediterranean States, Cyprus and Malta. The highest ratio (above 40%) is observable in Latvia and Lithuania. In general, post-socialist countries have a higher ratio of female managers: Estonia, Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Slovenia equally register a share of above 30%. The ratio of female managers is higher than 30% in Belgium, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal as well as Ireland and the United Kingdom. However, in North-European countries ( Denmark, Finland, Sweden), the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Germany, Austria and Greece the share of female managers is only between 20-30%. These data underline two interesting cultural-historical factors: although in a contradictory way, post-socialist countries achieved remarkable results in promoting this feature of gender equality. On the other hand, Nordic countries - cited as positive examples concerning gender equality in the fields of employment, part-time employment and combating unemployment - have a somewhat worse than average performance in this aspect of equal opportunity.

Inter-country differences in gender pay gap are difficult to interpret. While most of the Southern European states ( Malta, Portugal, Italy and Greece) register the lowest differences, Nordic countries, Estonia, Slovakia and Cyprus produce the highest differences. It seems that the smaller difference in opportunities of employment and the extension of part-time employment correlate rather negatively with the gender pay gap. Even bearing in mind that women and men have different employment characteristics by economic sectors and that working women tend to be younger ('less senior' and as a result, on average they have less opportunity to fulfil managerial positions), this underlines that a problem of equal opportunities continues to exist in all of the EU countries.

Gainful versus domestic work in the EU25

Examining gender inequalities in the world of work, we cannot neglect the fact that total work of women and men consists of two components: besides gainful (paid) work domestic (non-paid) work matters as well. While men spend more time than women on working in the workplace, the reverse is true for domestic work.

Regarding total work there is only one country in the EU, namely Sweden, in which women and men spend the same amount time. On the other hand, in Lithuania, Slovenia, Hungary, Estonia as well as in Italy and Spain the total number of hours worked per day is conspicuously higher for women than for men: the difference is more than one hour. Again, cultural and historical factors together explain the structure of use of time. Women living in post-socialist countries have an especially hard life in this respect: not only the gender inequalities in time use are significant, but also people in these countries work generally more than in the old EU member countries. As a result, Lithuanian women work more than 8 hours on average, i.e. almost two hours more than German women (the difference compared to German men is 2 hours and 14 minutes).

Gender peculiarities in education: an additional factor behind gender inequalities

Traditionally, equal opportunity researches focused on the problem of women. However dramatic changes in the educational success may indicate an (at least partial) shift towards the problem of men. Recent indicators underline that the share of women is already markedly higher among tertiary students (54.6%). This trend is valid across the EU; only in two countries ( Germany and Cyprus) have men a higher share among tertiary students (although the difference in favour of men is negligible in these countries: only 1%). In the other 23 EU countries women have a higher share among tertiary students; the difference in favour of women is especially striking in the 3 Baltic States (more than 20%). In the meantime, faculty segregation remained strong: on average, the share of women is 37.3% among students of science, mathematics and computing, while they represent 65.6% in faculties of humanities and art.

Not only tertiary education figures, but also upper secondary education data underline that in the future the problem of men could aggravate in the world of work. With the exception of the Czech Republic and the United Kingdom, a lower ratio of men completed at least upper secondary education in the age group 20- 24. In the overall EU25 the ratio of men is 74.6% compared to 80% of women. Differences in favour of women are especially high in Southern European countries. In addition, in Spain, but especially in Portugal and Malta the general level of completed upper secondary education is markedly lower than in other EU countries: only 40.4% of young Portuguese men and 41.7% of Maltese men were able to finish an upper secondary school with success.

Top

Sharing domestic responsibilities: the role of men

The third sub-theme is sharing responsibilities between men and women, and the role of men.

The last few decades the number of women entering the labour market increased considerably all over Europe, but men did not take up caring tasks in a proportionate way. In all European countries men take the biggest part in paid work, while women do most of the caring for children and the household. In most European countries women do twice as much caring for children than men. In all European countries women perform more care and household tasks than men, even if they have a full time paid job.

To illustrate this, some figures - for the countries participating in the Genderwise project - are provided concerning participation in paid work and concerning hours per week spent on household tasks by men and women.

Table 1: Labour market participation rates and weekly time for household tasks of men and women

As can be seen in this table, there is an important variation in male and female employment rates through Europe. The same goes for the variation in part time work of women. Therefore, it is interesting to look at difference in employment rates between men and women, in full time equivalents. The following graph shows this employment gap for 30 European countries.

Graph 1: Employment gap in full-time equivalents 2003

The actual division of tasks between the sexes is a problem as far as it hampers people's freedom of choice. Women more in particular are confronted with the limits of their possibilities and the restrictions in their freedom of choice. If women have to take up more paid work, men will have to be stimulated to take up more care tasks...and do less paid work.

For different reasons European governments and the European Union would like to see an increase in the labour market participation of women.

On macro level following reasons play explicitly or implicitly a role in this:

• Enforce the competitive power of (EU) countries;
• Limit the claims for income substitution;
• Enlarge the (financial) basis for taxes and social security;
• Keeping salary claims within certain limits.

There are also reasons on micro level to put the division of paid work and care tasks between men and women on the agenda. Realising the European countries' and the EU objective of increasing the labour market participation of women, is only realistic and fair, if this goes along with an increase in the share that men take in the care for children and the household. If men will not change, women will not increase their labour market participation, or they will have to accept much more work load for realising the increase in labour market participation.

Moreover women have also less freedom of choice as to the household tasks. Somebody has to perform the less agreeable tasks. If men to not take their responsibility, women will have to perform these tasks. At the end it is a matter of fair and just division if men gave a comparable contribution to the care for children and the household.

An important element of the context for these arguments lays in the demographic challenge. To ensure our future, we will need having more children AND more people (men and women) will have to take part longer in both paid work and unpaid care tasks.

There is a clear need therefore for initiatives in three policy directions at the same time:

• Children and family friendly equal opportunity policies
• Policies for alleviating the burden on women
• Increase incentives for men to take up more care tasks

Some of the policies developed during the last decades do not support a combination of these three directions. The development of 7 days, 24 hours child care facilities e.g. does alleviate the burden for women, but is not necessarily child friendly; neither does it stimulate men taking up more care tasks. Sometimes policy options in different sectors could even be conflicting. One example is the option to increase labour market participation of women and the option for counting more on voluntary caring. Policies to be developed should be proofed for their complementary quality as to the three policy directions.

The existing task division between men and women is influenced by three types of conditions on respectively the macro, meso and micro levels. These conditions influence both the degree of male involvement in care tasks (the quantity), and the kind of tasks that men perform in household and family (the quality).

Macro conditions

The macro conditions are related to time (flexible working patterns and leave schemes), money (tax systems) and provisions (child care). For a more fair division of all paid work and care tasks good national arrangements are necessary as to child care, parental leave, life cycle arrangements, the right to work part time etceteras. These arrangements are of great importance to make the first steps on the way to a more just division of tasks. Men will perform more tasks in the household. Women will get a more real possibility to take up paid work.

Some of the macro conditions to improve are in the fields of:

• Flexible working patterns
• (Paid) leave schemes on an individual basis
• Tax advantages for dual-income families sharing care responsibilities
• Adapted opening hours
• Accessible and affordable childcare facilities

Nevertheless, even if macro conditions are favourable for enabling men to take up care tasks, men have a clear preference for the type of tasks to fulfill (such as shopping and cooking) and for leaving other household tasks (such as cleaning and doing the laundry) for their partner. Also men have a clear preference for the care of the children above household tasks. There seems to be, as far as men are concerned, a clear hierarchy in the tasks to perform.

Research has shown that the difference between men and women in taking up care tasks is culturally determined. This means that this difference is open for change, even if change is not easy to realise. It becomes important not only to influence the amount of time that men and women invest in household and care, but also to change the division of the types of tasks. This could be done on a meso level through a qualitative approach of the conditions under which men and women divide paid work and care tasks.

On micro level efforts should concentrate on the dissociation of care tasks and gender stereotypes. This includes creating mechanisms to help women and men sharing care tasks, training men to take care of others and of themselves, campaigning for taking up existing facilities, etceteras. Tasks can become "beyond" gender.

The micro level: degendering tasks

More knowledge is needed about mechanisms behind the unfair division of household tasks. Tasks have a gender connotation. How to get them beyond gender? In a study by Verwey-Jonker Institute* this was done through an analysis of three tasks, i.e. shopping, doing the laundry and visiting the baby clinic. The description of each of these tasks shows that it is possible for a specific household task (e.g. shopping) to loose its female connotation. This will then mean that there is no barrier anymore for men to fulfil this task. A stimulating factor can be that a task is part of a "chain". When men do the cooking, they will consider it fully normal to do also the shopping. Men who dress their children in the morning will get concerned with the availability of clean cloths. The study also shows that visibility of a task and more tolerance (of women) for making mistakes (by men) are important factors for men to take up household tasks. In the Netherlands one could observe that visiting the baby clinic is an activity in full transition towards changing its gender connotation, while doing the laundry remains to a great deal a women's business.

Important interlocked mechanisms for (or against) "degendering" are:

• A "chain" approach: if one task from a chain becomes gender neutral, other tasks from the same chain could follow that direction easier;
• Visibility: men will more easily take up visible, public tasks such as shopping and visiting the baby clinic. If more men perform these tasks this will of course stimulate other men. But it could also influence taking up other tasks as far as they are part of a chain;
• Tolerance: another important element is the fact that men and women perform the same tasks in a different way. If men take up tasks that traditionally belong to the territory of women, tolerance for difference and for making mistakes will play an important role;
• Control and execution: household tasks can be transferred gradually from women to men. This could be first in terms of execution, while women keep control. Step by step men can take up also control over certain tasks. Shopping is a nice example for this. We could observe that older than younger men use shopping lists made by their partner. Younger men are more independent in shopping. We observed similar mechanisms in doing the laundry.
• Home alone: men take up household and child care tasks more easily if they are alone at home with the children. This point refers to meso conditions, namely the organisation of paid work in relation to the care for household and family.

Influence of the conditions: study of exceptional practices

In the same study of Verwey-Jonker institute, researchers also wanted to investigate to what extend the conditions influence both opinions about task division and the factual behaviour. Therefore they questioned household types that could be seen as having an "exceptional" practice in terms of the conditions for combining paid work and care tasks. In the "standard practice" a household is composed of a man, a women and a child or children; the man has paid work outside the home at regular hours (between 8:00 and 18:00 hours) and the woman (with or without a paid job) is (mostly) responsible for household and care tasks. A practice is considered as "exceptional" if the man works at non-regular hours, or has an unusual work pattern, or is part of a special type of household. The study included 30 exceptional households, consisting of households with shift working men, with men doing tele-work and households with homosexual fathers.

The most important conclusion of studying the exceptional practices was that opinions and preferences of men in relation to the task division between men and women are strongly related to the possibilities of men to combine caring with paid work. In households where a more equal task division already exists, competences of men, their preferences and the traditions of their education seem hardly important. The opinions of men are flexible if they - due to changing conditions - have to perform certain tasks. Even (supposedly poor) competences no longer appear to play a role. Being at home alone with the children appears to be an important stimulus for men to really performing caring tasks. A similar conclusion was drawn from Norwegian research into men on parental leave.

Innovations in European countries

In most European countries it appears that a more fair division of paid work and care tasks between men and women is an urgent issue. But situations and traditions are pretty different. So are the issues at stake, the challenges to overcome and the appropriate answers. As example the study gives a short image of issues in three countries that stand for three different societal and policy traditions in respect to conciliation of work and family life: Sweden, France and Spain. Looking into good practices (mostly at local level) for stimulating men to take up child care and household tasks this gives the following images.

Sweden has a longstanding tradition of state intervention in relation to the role of fathers. In this field local authorities developed several initiatives influencing the amount of child care tasks that men take up within the household. Most of these initiatives are indeed limited to the care for the children. Putting the division of household tasks between men and women on the (family) agenda appears also in Sweden a difficult issue.

In this respect it is remarkable that the latter is explicitly the case in Spain. On local level as well as in national campaigns, the Spanish public authorities stimulate men to take up more care tasks. Both care for the children and for the household are included in these campaigns. Apparently Spain is catching up for a more traditionalist past. At the same time, social scientists in Spain are warning for the distance between the political and the social moral in these issues.

In France it seems to be difficult putting the subject of men and care on the policy agenda. The cause lays in the fear for public interference with "private" issues. Slowly the societal climate is changing also in France, as to make it possible to intervene in this field, because the limits of what could be achieved with improvements of macro- and meso conditions become more and more clear. France has a strong tradition on these levels. But people do ask themselves whether the wellbeing of children (and their parents) is served with a stay of more than ten hours a day outside the family. Also, more and more (local) policy makers realise that the principle of non intervention in the "private" sphere leads to a systematic overburden on women, which has great influence also on the possibilities for women to participating in public life.

* J.W. Duyvendak & M. Stavenuiter (eds.) (2004). Working Fathers, Caring Men. Ministry of Employment and Social Affairs, Verwey-Jonker Institute. The Hague, Utrecht.

Top