Gender-based Violence and the Nordic Paradox:

Q3 Social Sciences
Mascha Wiechmann
{"title":"Gender-based Violence and the Nordic Paradox:","authors":"Mascha Wiechmann","doi":"10.31265/jcsw.v17i2.572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) is a long-standing and global phenomenon, that is considered, both public health and social problem which seems difficult to tackle (Gracia et al., 2019; Wemrell et al., 2021). Although some research suggests that gender equality plays an important role in reducing IPVAW (Gracia et al., 2019; Wemrell et al., 2021), the so-called Nordic Paradox – a situation where seemingly the most gender equal states, i.e., Nordic countries (including, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland) report the highest numbers of IPVAW – appears to contradict this supposition (Gracia & Merlo, 2016). To date, there is no agreement as to why, and whether, this is the case. In this short paper, I shall review three academic articles that aim to address this contradiction, focusing on their methodologies and limitations.\n \nIn this essay, firstly, I will discuss how I approached the literature search. Secondly, I will present an overview of IPVAW and the Nordic paradox. Thirdly, I will discuss Gracia and colleagues (2019) and Permanyer and Gomez-Casillas's (2020) analysis, which are based on the same survey (FRA, 2014). Fourthly, I will examine the chosen literature and lastly, I will consider whether, and if so to what extent, high gender equality score and violence against women go hand in hand.","PeriodicalId":37599,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Comparative Social Work","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Comparative Social Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31265/jcsw.v17i2.572","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) is a long-standing and global phenomenon, that is considered, both public health and social problem which seems difficult to tackle (Gracia et al., 2019; Wemrell et al., 2021). Although some research suggests that gender equality plays an important role in reducing IPVAW (Gracia et al., 2019; Wemrell et al., 2021), the so-called Nordic Paradox – a situation where seemingly the most gender equal states, i.e., Nordic countries (including, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland) report the highest numbers of IPVAW – appears to contradict this supposition (Gracia & Merlo, 2016). To date, there is no agreement as to why, and whether, this is the case. In this short paper, I shall review three academic articles that aim to address this contradiction, focusing on their methodologies and limitations.   In this essay, firstly, I will discuss how I approached the literature search. Secondly, I will present an overview of IPVAW and the Nordic paradox. Thirdly, I will discuss Gracia and colleagues (2019) and Permanyer and Gomez-Casillas's (2020) analysis, which are based on the same survey (FRA, 2014). Fourthly, I will examine the chosen literature and lastly, I will consider whether, and if so to what extent, high gender equality score and violence against women go hand in hand.
基于性别的暴力与北欧悖论:
亲密伴侣暴力侵害妇女(IPVAW)是一种长期存在的全球性现象,被认为是公共卫生和社会问题,似乎很难解决(Gracia等人,2019;Wemrell等人,2021)。尽管一些研究表明,性别平等在减少IPVAW方面发挥着重要作用(Gracia et al.,2019;Wemrell et al.,2021),但所谓的北欧悖论——一种似乎性别最平等的国家,即。,北欧国家(包括挪威、丹麦、瑞典和芬兰)报告的IPVAW数量最高——似乎与这一假设相矛盾(Gracia&Merlo,2016)。到目前为止,还没有就为什么以及是否会出现这种情况达成一致。在这篇短文中,我将回顾三篇旨在解决这一矛盾的学术文章,重点介绍它们的方法和局限性。在这篇文章中,首先,我将讨论我是如何进行文献检索的。其次,我将概述IPVAW和北欧悖论。第三,我将讨论Gracia及其同事(2019)以及Permanyer和Gomez-Casillas(2020)基于同一调查的分析(FRA,2014)。第四,我将审查所选的文献,最后,我将考虑高性别平等分数和暴力侵害妇女行为是否同时存在,如果是,在多大程度上。
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
Journal of Comparative Social Work
Journal of Comparative Social Work Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal promotes contributions, discussions and an exchange of knowledge on Social Work issues. Social Work is a line of work carried out by trained professionals, or "Social Workers", in many different countries. Accordingly, the nature of social work can vary widely. However, its broad aim is to assess and meet people''s social needs by providing services that enable them to live in safety, independence and dignity. In order to appropriately cater to the needs of the people they serve, the practices, aims and values of Social Workers must reflect the cultural and social norms of the society in which they operate. Comparative social work emphasizes comparative studies of social work between different countries, cultures and contexts. The journal aims to support practitioners and academics alike through its discussions of matters relevant to Social Work Practice. This journal publishes two types of peer-reviewed scientific articles on subjects of importance for social work, with a special emphasis on comparative research on different aspects. This includes: -Comparative studies -Single site studies that also generate insight and knowledge in various geographical/cultural and national settings. We also welcome essays discussing/reflecting relevant subjects from an individual point of view, and at least two members of our editorial board will review such papers (maximum of 3,000 words). The JCSW was founded in 2006 and is currently hosted by the University of Stavanger, in cooperation with the University of Agder and the University of Nordland.
×
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