Defamilisation measures and women's labour force participation – a comparative study of twelve countries

References

• Bambra, C. (2004). The worlds of welfare: Illusory and gender blind. Social Policy and Society, 3(3), 201–211. doi: 10.1017/S147474640400171X
   Google Scholar
• Bambra, C. (2005). Cash versus services: “worlds of welfare” and the decommodification of cash benefits and health care services. Journal of Social Policy, 34(2), 195–213. doi: 10.1017/S0047279404008542
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bambra, C. (2007). Defamilisation and welfare state regimes: A cluster analysis. International Journal of Social Welfare, 16, 326–338. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2397.2007.00486.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett, F., & Daly, M. (2014). Poverty through a gender lens: Evidence and policy review on gender and poverty. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Castles, F. G., & Mitchell, D. (1993). Worlds of welfare and families of nations. In F. G. Castles (Ed.), Families of nations: Patterns of public policy in western democracies (pp. 93–128). Aldershot: Dartmouth.
   Google Scholar
• Chau, R., Foster, L., & Yu, S. (2016) Defamilisation and familisation measures – can they reduce the adverse effects of pro-market pension reforms on women in Hong Kong and the UK? Critical Social Policy, 36(2), 205–224. doi: 10.1177/0261018315621989
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chzhen, Y. (2010). Gender differences in earnings and occupational attainment in Europe (Doctoral Thesis). University of York, Department of Social Policy and Social Work, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Daly, M. (2011). What adult worker model? A critical look at recent social policy reform in Europe from a gender and family perspective. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 18(1), 1–23. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxr002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. London: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social foundation of postindustrial economies. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foster, L. (2010). Towards a new political economy of pensions? The implications for women. Critical Social Policy, 30(1), 27–47. doi: 10.1177/0261018309350807
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Javornik, J. (2014). Measuring state de-familialism: Contesting post-socialist exceptionalism. Journal of European Social Policy, 24(3), 240–257. doi: 10.1177/0958928714525815
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kangas, O. (1994). The politics of social security: On regressions, qualitative comparsions and cluster analysis. In T. Janoski, A. Hicks (Eds.), The comparative political economy of the welfare state (pp. 346–364). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Karim, S. A., Eikemo, T. A., & Bambra, C. (2010). Welfare state regimes and population health: Integrating the East Asian welfare states. Health Policy, 94(1), 45–53. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.08.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasza, G. (2002). The illusion of welfare regimes. Journal of Social Policy, 31(2), 271–287. doi: 10.1017/S0047279401006584
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korpi, W. (2000). Faces of inequality: Gender, class and patterns of inequalities in different types of welfare state. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 7(2), 127–191. doi: 10.1093/sp/7.2.127
   Google Scholar
• Korpi, W. (2010). Class and gender inequalities in different types of welfare states: The social citizenship indicator program. International Journal of Social Welfare, 19(S1), S14–S24. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2397.2010.00730.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroger, T. (2011). Defamilisation, dedomestication and care policy: Comparing childcare service provisions of welfare states. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 31(7/8), 424–440. doi: 10.1108/01443331111149860
   Google Scholar
• Leitner, S. (2003). Varieties of familialism: The caring function of the family in comparative perspective. European Societies, 5(4), 353–375. doi: 10.1080/1461669032000127642
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leitner, S. (2005). Conservative familialism reconsidered: The case of Belgium. Acta Politica, 40, 419–439. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lister, R. (1994). ‘She has other duties’: Women, citizenship and social security. In S. Baldwin & J. Falkingham (Eds.), Social security and social change: New challenges to the beveridge model (pp. 31–44). New York and London: Harvester.
   Google Scholar
• Lohmann, H., & Zagel, H. (2016). Family policy in comparative perspective: The concepts and measurement of familization and defamilization. Journal of European Social Policy, 26(1), 48–65. doi: 10.1177/0958928715621712
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaughlin, E. and Glendinning, C. (1994). Paying for care in Europe: Is there a feminist approach? In L. Hantrais & S. Mangen (Eds.), Family policy and the welfare of women (pp. 52–59). Loughborough: University of Loughborough.
   Google Scholar
• Michon, P. (2008). Familisation and defamilisation policy in 22 European countries. Poznan University of Economics Review, 8(1), 34–54.
   Google Scholar
• Nyberg, A. (2002). Gender, (de)commodification, economic (in)dependence and autonomous households: The case of Sweden. Critical Social Policy, 22(1), 72–95. doi: 10.1177/02610183020220010701
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2011). OECD encouraging quality in early childhood education and care. Retrieved January 12, 2017, from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/49322823.pdf
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2014). OECD family database. Retrieved February 20, 2014, from www.oecd.org/els/social/family/database
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2016). OECD employment statistics database. Retrieved November, 26, 2016, from http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?QueryId=64196
   Google Scholar
• Orloff, A. (1993). Gender and social rights of citizenship: The comparative analysis of gender relations and welfare sates. American Sociological Review, 58(3), 303–328. doi: 10.2307/2095903
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pankratz, C. (2009). Cross-national comparisons of family policies: The relevance of national approaches to social welfare. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 40(3), 493–511.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price, D. (2007). Closing the gender gap in retirement income: What difference will recent UK pension reforms make? Journal of Social Policy, 36(4), 561–523. doi: 10.1017/S0047279407001183
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pylkkanen, E. and Smith, N. (2003). Career interruptions due to parental leave: A comparative study of Denmark and Sweden. (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Social, Employment and Migration Working Paper). Retrieved December 8, 2016, from http://www.oecd.org/social/family/2502336.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sainsbury, D. (1999). Gender, policy regimes and politics. In D. Sainsbury (Ed.), Gender and welfare state regimes (pp. 245–276). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Saraceno, C., & Keck, W. (2010). Can we identify intergenerational policy regimes in Europe? European Societies, 12(5), 675–696. doi: 10.1080/14616696.2010.483006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thévenon, O. (2013). Drivers of female labour force participation in the OECD (OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 145). Paris: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. (2010). The world’s women 2010: Trends and statistics. Retrieved February 10, 2014, from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/Worldswomen/WW2010pub.htm
   Google Scholar
• Van der Lippe, T., de Ruijter, J., de Ruitjter, E., & Raub, W. (2011). Persistent inequalities in time use between men and women: A detailed look at the influence of economic circumstances, policies and culture. European Sociological Review, 27(2), 164–179. doi: 10.1093/esr/jcp066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, A., & Wong, C. K. (2005). Introduction: East asian welfare regimes. In A. Walker & C. K. Wong (Eds.), East Asian welfare regimes in transition (pp. 3–20). Hong Kong: The Policy Press.
   Google Scholar