Scandinavian Approaches to Gender Equality in Academia: A Comparative Study

ABSTRACT

This study investigates how Denmark, Norway, and Sweden approach issues of gender equality in research differently. Based on a comparative document analysis of gender equality activities in six Scandinavian universities, together with an examination of the legislative and political frameworks surrounding these activities, the article provides new insights into the respective strategies for governing and promoting the advancement of women researchers. In doing so, it exposes some interesting disparities among the cases and shows how Norwegian and Swedish gender equality activities revolve around a broader span of different approaches than the Danish. The study draws upon existing knowledge on the efficacy and implementation success of diversity policy programmes to gain a more profound understanding of implications of these differences.

KEYWORDS:

• Gender equality
• Scandinavia
• higher education
• research staff
• comparative policy analysis
• action plans
• diversity

Notes

¹By countries is here meant GE-related activities at the national level.

²These data were gathered from the university websites.

³As of December 20, 2014, The University of Bergen listed this on their website: http://www.uib.no/aktuelt/50070/uib-vil-ha-mer-mangfold

⁴As of December 20, 2014, The Danish website Kvindernes blå bog listed this on their website: http://www.kvindernesblaabog.dk/Default.aspx?pageid=4090

⁵As of May 1, 2013, The Norwegian Committee for Gender Balance in Research listed this on their website: http://eng.kifinfo.no/nyhet/vis.html?tid=80513

⁶Preferential treatment here refers to: “If two or more applicants to a vacant post have approximately equivalent qualifications for the post, applicants from the gender that is underrepresented in the category of post concerned shall be given preference” (Norway, 2006, §21).

⁷As of May 1, 2013, the Research Council of Norway listed this on their websites: http://www.forskningsradet.no/no/Utlysning/BALANSE/1253968801344 and http://www.forskningsradet.no/prognett-balanse/Om_programmet/1253964606557

⁸As of May 1, 2014, The Swedish Council of Higher Education listed this on their website: http://www.uhr.se/sv/Framjande-och-analys/Delegationen-for-jamstalldhet/DJ---projekt/

⁹As of May 1, 2013, the Norwegian Committee for Gender Equality in Research listed this on their website: http://kifinfo.no/c42786/seksjon.html?tid=43024

¹⁰For an overview of the organisational texts underpinning this part of the analysis, see Appendix A.

¹¹Organisational intervention and actions initiated at the central level of the organisation, including financial incentive programmes and rewarding principles, are not included in discussion.

¹²The 2012 numbers are based on an email correspondence with the GE consultant of Bergen University.

¹³This information was gathered via the email interviews with GE consultants, in which I specifically asked the consultants whether (and how) their universities’ made use of sanctions when faculties failed to fulfil their responsibilities.

¹⁴This information was provided by the GE consultant at Lund University in the email interview, as an example of how LU commits decentralised entities to GE work. For a concrete example of an annual GE declaration see Appendix A2: LU [2012]).

¹⁵As of May 12, 2013, Lund University listed this on their websites: http://www4.lu.se/wings and http://www4.lu.se/wings/step-up