Maternal Employment and Childcare Use from an Intersectional Perspective: Stratification along Class, Contractual and Gender Lines in Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden and the UK

IF 1.7 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL ISSUES
Social Politics Pub Date : 2023-08-02 DOI:10.1093/sp/jxad021
Emanuele Ferragina, Edoardo Magalini
{"title":"Maternal Employment and Childcare Use from an Intersectional Perspective: Stratification along Class, Contractual and Gender Lines in Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden and the UK","authors":"Emanuele Ferragina, Edoardo Magalini","doi":"10.1093/sp/jxad021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Connecting streams of feminist and comparative social policy literature, this article investigates stratification in maternal employment and childcare use along class, contractual, and gender lines across six countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) and five family policy models. Detailing the different stratifying factors that intervene in the relation between maternal employment and childcare use offers a concrete analysis of the complex link between social reproduction and work. Employing multivariate regressions and EU-SILC (2007–2018) data, it provides an intersectional perspective to the literature. First, we observe a process of formalization in childcare use with a parallel reduction of nonformal care for couples; this process is slower for single mothers. Second, we document a paradox in relation to the social investment approach: the relation between childcare use and maternal employment is stronger in countries that recently expanded childcare to modify their male-breadwinner orientation, but in these countries childcare use is more stratified along class/contract types, a concern for the outcomes of social investment strategies outside of Scandinavia. Being out of work, being in a lower social class, fulfilling domestic tasks and/or care activities, and having an atypical contract negatively correlates with childcare use in most countries. Third, households where partners have more similar earning levels use childcare to a greater extent. The article also provides models employing different dependent and independent variables, alternative family structures, full and part-time work, formal and nonformal childcare, and rich country details.","PeriodicalId":47441,"journal":{"name":"Social Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxad021","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Connecting streams of feminist and comparative social policy literature, this article investigates stratification in maternal employment and childcare use along class, contractual, and gender lines across six countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) and five family policy models. Detailing the different stratifying factors that intervene in the relation between maternal employment and childcare use offers a concrete analysis of the complex link between social reproduction and work. Employing multivariate regressions and EU-SILC (2007–2018) data, it provides an intersectional perspective to the literature. First, we observe a process of formalization in childcare use with a parallel reduction of nonformal care for couples; this process is slower for single mothers. Second, we document a paradox in relation to the social investment approach: the relation between childcare use and maternal employment is stronger in countries that recently expanded childcare to modify their male-breadwinner orientation, but in these countries childcare use is more stratified along class/contract types, a concern for the outcomes of social investment strategies outside of Scandinavia. Being out of work, being in a lower social class, fulfilling domestic tasks and/or care activities, and having an atypical contract negatively correlates with childcare use in most countries. Third, households where partners have more similar earning levels use childcare to a greater extent. The article also provides models employing different dependent and independent variables, alternative family structures, full and part-time work, formal and nonformal childcare, and rich country details.
交叉视角下的母亲就业和儿童保育使用:丹麦、法国、德国、意大利、瑞典和英国的阶级、契约和性别分层
摘要:本文结合女权主义和比较社会政策的文献流,研究了六个国家(丹麦、法国、德国、意大利、瑞典和英国)在阶级、契约和性别方面的母亲就业和儿童保育使用分层,以及五种家庭政策模型。详细介绍了影响产妇就业和儿童保育使用之间关系的不同分层因素,为社会再生产和工作之间的复杂联系提供了具体分析。采用多元回归和EU-SILC(2007-2018)数据,为文献提供了交叉视角。首先,我们观察到儿童保育使用的正规化过程,同时减少了对夫妇的非正规护理;对于单身母亲来说,这个过程要慢一些。其次,我们记录了与社会投资方法相关的一个悖论:在最近扩大托儿服务以改变其男性养家者取向的国家,托儿服务使用与母亲就业之间的关系更强,但在这些国家,托儿服务使用更按阶级/合同类型分层,这是斯堪的纳维亚半岛以外社会投资策略结果的一个问题。在大多数国家,失业、处于较低的社会阶层、完成家务和/或护理活动以及拥有非典型合同与儿童保育的使用呈负相关。第三,夫妻收入水平相近的家庭更大程度上使用托儿服务。本文还提供了采用不同因变量和自变量、替代性家庭结构、全职和兼职工作、正规和非正规儿童保育以及富裕国家细节的模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Social Politics
Social Politics Multiple-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
10.50%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Social Politics is the journal for incisive analyses of gender, politics and policy across the globe. It takes on the critical emerging issues of our age: globalization, transnationality and citizenship, migration, diversity and its intersections, the restructuring of capitalisms and states. We engage with feminist theoretical issues and with theories of welfare regimes, "varieties of capitalism," the ideational and cultural turns in social science, governmentality and postcolonialism. We are looking for articles that engage in this exciting mix of debates that will be of interest to our multidisciplinary and international audience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信