Trends and differences in closing the gender gap in the EU Chiara - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Trends and differences in closing the gender gap in the EU

Chiara Saraceno

The EU may help upward convergence,but

• Country specific social, cultyral and family models are

partly different

• Globalization (including migration) reshuffles differences

but also creates new ones

• The EU has initiated a long process of redefinition of

gender roles

• But without touching important dimensions such as family

legislation and partly also reproductive rights.

• Austerity policies have also weakened policies aimed at

rebalancing gender relationships and inequalities, with particularly negative consequences in the countries that were late come in the process

According to the 2013 EIGE report, because of the crisis

• There has been a reduction of the gender gap in

employment and wages, but because of a worsening of men’s conditions

• Women have remained in the labour market
• Austerity measures may worsen the work-family situation
• In the large majority of countries no attention for the

gender impact of austerity measures. But there are important cross country differences, also because of different starting points

Employment, unemployment, inactivity

With the crisis

• Men’s employment has suffered more than

women’s

• Women are still more present among the inactive,

but the increase has been higher among men

• Unvoluntary part time has increased everywhere,

and more so where it was already high.

• Men loose their job more frequently, but find

another one more quickly

• “added worker” effect: dual workers couples have

increased, and, to a lower degree, also couples in which only the woman works.

Poverty risk

• In most countries women have a higher risk
• f poverty than men, but
• Due to the crisis, in many countries, men’s

risk of poverty has increased (including in work poverty), causing a reduction in the gender gap without any improvement for women

•  the family status plays a different role in

men’s and women’s risk of poverty

Work-family conciliation

Crucial dimensions pertain to

• Work organization
• Men’s behaviour
• Time and services policies

 All three these dimensions show cross countries variation

• There is a positive correlation between

women’s employment and men’s participation in paid work, at the country and at the individual level.

• But with important cross countries

differences (cultural models?)

Trends in social spending 2011-2012

Nursery school (0-3) and kindergarden attendance

Care for the frail old. Coverage rates through home and residential care, for the > 65 anni population

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% NO DK NL SE FI BE FR AU UK LU MT IE DE SI PT CZ ES HU IT SK EE PL EL LT BG RO

% anziani in strutture residenziali % anziani che ricevono servizi domiciliari

Men and women in decision making

In the EU parliament

17% 18% 22% 23% 32% 32% 32% 32% 33% 33% 33% 33% 36% 36% 36% 38% 38% 41% 41% 42% 45% 46% 46% 46% 50% 50% 50% 62% 5 22 51 73 73 19 22 22 18 6 9 12 754 22 33 99 13 54 22 12 20 74 13 26 6 6 8 13 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

LU C Z P L IT U K AT BE E L BG C Y LV LT E U-27 HU R O DE S K ES P T IE SE F R D K NL MT E E S I F I <20% 20-40% 40-60% >60% Men Number of ME Ps Women:

Ministers with portfolio in national governments

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 5 4 % 5 % 4 8 % 4 7 % 4 3 % 3 8 % 3 8 % 3 8 % 3 % 2 9 % 2 9 % 2 7 % 2 4 % 2 1 % 2 % 1 8 % 1 8 % 1 8 % 1 5 % 1 3 % 1 3 % 1 3 % 1 % 8 % 8 % 7 % 6 % 5 % 5 % 4 % 2 6 % 1 8 % 9 % 4 % S E FR DK FI AT B E NL DE IT E S LV LU BG SI P L UK RO CZ P T LT IE MT HU C Y EE S K E L IS NO LI R S HR MK TR >40% 30-40% 20-30% 10-20% <10% Men W

• men:

G ender balance zone

EU-27 average, 27%

MPs in national parliaments 2013

In top position in public administration

Level 1 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2 9 % 5 2 % 3 6 % 4 1 % 4 6 % 2 % 3 7 % 3 6 % 2 % 2 9 % 3 9 % 2 5 % 3 3 % 2 2 % 2 3 % 3 % 2 2 % 2 2 % 1 3 % 7 % 2 4 % 1 3 % 1 5 % 1 4 % 2 1 % 0 % 8 % 2 5 % 4 % 3 3 % 3 3 % 1 5 % 5 % 0 % SK SI LV BG R O E E SE E L LT FI PL P T ES IT AT C Y UK F R C Z MT N L IE DK H U DE LU BE LI N O MK H R R S IS T R

Women Men

EU-27 average, 29%

Men and women in administration boards. April 2013. Increasing, but..And still very few at the very top

Within the university, still far from balanced and cross country differentiation

• From 36% in Romania to 20% in Italy and

Sweden, to 17% in Austria, Estonia, Regno unito e Spagna, down to 15% in Germany and Denmark and 9% in Luxemburg.

Concluding remarks

Trends towards an upwards closing of the gender gap

• Appear more, although still partially, in the higher section
• f distribution (administration boards, parliaments), less

so for the majority of women.

• Austerity policies, in so far they affect services and income

transfers, are in contrast with gender equality goals and are likely to affect more negatively women in the middle and lower end of the distribution

• The contrast is particularly evident in countries that were

farther from those goals to begin with (see e.g. the Spanish case)

Furthermore, crucial issues for gender equality and women’s autonomy are left to national legislation and their differences, e.g.:

• Contraception and abortion
• Access to reproductive technology
• Divorce
• Marriage
• Protection against violence