Chapter 1 International Differences in Women's Labour Force Participation: Theoretical Approaches Comparative Analysis in Sociology Since sociology has become a scientific discipline in its own right a whole host of studies have been conducted that compare societies in order to investigate individual issues. The comparison of societies was ... made an explicit method that was now regarded as the safe and ideal solution for the execution of the discipline's concept of social history.1 The works of the leading authorities in sociology (such as Marx, Dürkheim, and Weber) that are concerned with comparative research were to a considerable extent influenced by classical evolution-theoretical concepts according to which countries experience the same sequence of historical phases in the process of 'civilization' (cf. Boudon 1986, Tominaga 1991, Wimmer 1996). The objective of comparisons in Emile Durkheim's sociology was not the explanation of differences but the discovery of variants of universal phenomena in the societies compared. According to Matthes(1992), ... this method did not compare differences, but a variable that has been projectively abstracted from a certain societal context and turned in a universal 'theoretical' construct is tested in the real world for its variations.2 These variations were then categorized on the basis of the 'central idea' that social development progresses in steps from the 'traditional' to the 'modern' society; the yardstick for the 'modern' society, which was regarded as positive in the normative sense, were Western European industrial countries. Specific characteristics of individual societies were played down and marginalized by Dürkheim as 'cultural features' and not made the subject of analysis or explanation. According to Matthes, this understanding of the 'Operation called Vergleichen' (the title of his essay) is also dominant in contemporary sociology; he also criticized the lack of theoretical approaches that take variety as the starting point.3 Quite early, however, a competing tradition of sociological comparison developed that explicitly concentrated on the differences between societies. The origin of this branch of research was in ethnomethodology, represented, for example, by Malinowski. This type of argumentation emphasized that societies were unique. 14 Development of Culture, Welfare States and Womens Employment in Europe International Differences in Women's Labour Force Participation 15 coherent units that could be understood only in their respective uniqueness and entirety. The relations of cultural values, social institutions, and the practice of social actors has always been a controversial matter, though. On the one hand there are 'idealistic' theories according to which the variations of phenomena in the comparison of societies are best explained by the influences of the cultural system. On the other hand, representatives of structuralistic and institutional theories generally assume that social structures and the influence of institutions are mainly responsible for such differences. This type of approach can primarily be found in theory formation with regard to comparative analysis of the development of women's labour force participation (see also O'Reilly 1996). Two types of theories can be differentiated. One tries to explain cross-national differences in the behaviour of individuals with welfare state policy and distinguishes between different 'welfare regimes' or 'regimes of government gender policy'. The other, also a structuralistic or institutional theory, deals with the relations of the various institutions or structures and the way the gendered division of labour is produced and reproduced on this basis. Here the structural dimension is either put before the dimension of cultural values, as in the patriarchal-theoretical approach, or culture and institutions are treated as a coherent unit. In the following, the most important of the existing theoretical approaches to comparison are introduced and their contribution to an explanation is discussed. Explanation with Differences in Welfare State Policy The explanation approaches to cross-national differences in women's labour force participation often come from the more recent international discourse in social policy research. Here the differences are explained with country-specific variations in welfare state policy. In the early 1990s the sociological discourse gained new impetus from the influential works of Scandinavian resource theorists such as Gosta Esping-Andersen and Walter Korppi, in which the connection between welfare state policy and gainful employment plays an important role. In this respect the book Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism by Esping-Andersen (1990) was met with a tremendous response. There the author investigates how welfare states in Western industrial societies influence the structures of social inequality. According to Esping-Andersen, various 'welfare regimes' can be identified in which the state - in different ways and with different objectives - intervenes in the market and affects the social distribution of resources. The differences are due to the fact that policy orients with the specific principles each welfare state is based on. These welfare regimes can be distinguished on the basis of three criteria: the quality of social rights, their effects on the structures of social inequality, and the way state, market and family are related. According to this theory, the quality of social rights depends to a considerable extent on the degree of decommodification in a society that is caused by the welfare state. Esping-Andersen hereby refers to the degree to which individuals are enabled by social security provided by the welfare state to secure their livelihood by other means than through gainful employment: ... the degree to which individuals, or families, can uphold a socially acceptable standard of living independently of market participation. (1990: 37) The extent of decommodification of labour on the other hand, as Esping-Andersen argued, affects the conditions under which individuals have to sell their labour, the size of wages, the welfare and security of the workers, and their opportunities to organize themselves collectively for their own interests.4 Thereby the state also creates different settings for the gainful employment of women (see also Kolberg/ Esping-Andersen 1991). On this basis Esping-Andersen (1990) ideal-typically differentiates between the social democratic, the conservative-corporate, and the liberal welfare regime. The social democratic welfare regime, which according to the author can be found especially in the Scandinavian countries, is characterized by universal social citizen rights and a high degree of decommodification. It typically tends to promote an evening out of social inequalities. This type of welfare state policy - the Swedish welfare state is the prototype for Esping-Andersen - is based on the idea that men and women should both be fully integrated in gainful employment and that the state is primarily responsible for the production of social welfare. Hence the welfare state provides a wide range of social services. It thereby also becomes one of the most important employers for women. A prerequisite for the realization of this type of welfare state is the heavy taxation of incomes. As this requires the participation of the middle classes in the consensus, welfare state benefits are provided on a qualitatively high level that meets the demands also of the middle classes. In the conservative-corporate welfare regime on the other hand - which according to the approach of Esping-Andersen (1990) is typical especially for continental Western Europe, e.g. West Germany, Austria, and France - the state plays an important role in the distribution of welfare, and decommodification is an important policy element. In contrast to the Scandinavian welfare regime, however, social policy does not orient with the principles of solidarity or try to even out social inequalities but rather tends to reproduce the existing structures of vertical inequality. Accordingly, the entitlements to benefits from the social security system vary with the size of income. The family is of particular importance for the production of social services. Government transfer payments and services come into effect only when the family is unable to generate these itself. At the same time, gainful employment of women is not promoted, for example the state does not provide any special services that support the entry of mothers into the employment system. This restriction of employment creates a fundamental problem: according to Esping-Andersen, a relatively small part of the population has to generate the wage and salary income that is to secure the livelihood also of those parts of the population who are not gainfully employed.5 The liberal model of the welfare state, realized especially in the Anglo-American countries, is based on liberal ideals according to which the 'free play of the market forces' is the best guarantee for a fair distribution. Here the state tries to interfere tn the market as little as possible and to maintain the commodity character of labour to a large extent. The function of the state in this welfare regime is more a residual one, i.e. to cushion the worst effects of poverty. Here the degree of decommodification is particularly low and all adult individuals are generally forced Development of Culture, Welfare States and Women's Employment in Europe International Differences in Women's Labour Force Participation 17 to provide for themselves through gainful employment. The benefits granted by the social security systems are relatively low. With this policy, as Esping-Andersen argues, liberal welfare regimes reinforce the existing structures of social inequality. A special policy for the promotion of women's gainful employment, for example by providing an extensive supply of public kindergarten places, is not intended, 'concepts of gender matter less than the sanctity of the market' (Esping-Andersen 1990: 28).6 According to Kolberg and Esping-Andersen (1991) three labour market regimes can be differentiated, complementary to the three welfare regimes, with respect fothe extent the welfare state assumes the function of an employer. In countries where the full employment of women is an element of welfare state policy the state plays an important role as an employer, especially with respect to female employment. Where the state's function is only a residual one, however, it fulfils this role only to a very limited extent. Esping-Andersen's principal explanation of the differences between the welfare states is that social democracy's capability to form class coalitions varied historically (Esping-Andersen 1990). His argumentation contains an important idea although it has not been theoretically pursued in all respects: this idea is that the attitude of the welfare state to female gainful employment is an important distinguishing feature of welfare regimes. Nevertheless, some objections to this theory can be raised. 1 Although Esping-Andersen's typification of welfare states is convincing, his assumption that the general principles of welfare state policy he identified were linked to a respective specific policy as to women's participation in gainful employment does not seem plausible to me. It is difficult to see why basic cultural principles of a policy that attaches particular value to the decommodification of labour and pursues the objective of an egalitarian social structure (as in the social democratic model) were to be logically linked to the idea of women's full integration in the labour market. Empirically, this is the case for Swedish model, the one Esping-Andersen refers to, and even more so for the Finnish welfare state (see Chapter 6). In Norway, however, a society whose welfare state policy also corresponds to the social democratic regime, policy did not orient with the idea of full employment of women until well into the 1980s; this is also evident from the data on women's labour force participation (see Figure 1.1 and Leira 2002, Ellingsaeter 1999, Pfau-Effinger 2001). The discrepancy between the general principles of welfare state policy and policy regarding women's labour force participation in gainful employment is even clearer in the development of the Dutch welfare state. According to Esping-Andersen (1990), the general cultural principles that policy has been based on in recent decades corresponded to a significant extent to those of the social democratic welfare regime. With respect to the familial and gendered division of labour, however, practical policy tended to support the housewife marriage and promoted opportunities that allowed women to stay at home as long as their children lived in the household (see Chapter 5). In Esping-Andersen's theory the promotion of the housewife marriage is a feature of the conservative-corporate welfare regime. Hence his close theoretical connection of welfare regime and gender policy of the welfare state proves problematic. It should rather be assumed that for every 'regime type' there is a certain range of policies with respect to women's gainful employment, as also Duncan (1998a) has argued. 2 Even though Esping-Andersen has declared the attitude of the welfare state to female gainful employment an important distinguishing feature of welfare regimes the explanatory value of this approach is limited with respect to women's labour force participation. The emphasis of the theoretical argumentation is on the relationship of state and market. The family and the fact that women use some of their labour to do unpaid family work are not sufficiently taken into account (Leitner 1999, Orloff 1993). In this sense, Orloff has argued: Provision of welfare 'counts' only when it occurs through the state or the market, while women's unpaid work in the home is ignored. Furthermore, the sexual division of labour within states, markets, and families also goes unnoticed. (Orloff 1993: 315) This also ignores that women's position on the labour market and the welfare state differs from that of men7 although this can have significant consequences for the decision of women to be gainfully employed during the period of active motherhood. 3 There is also too much emphasis on the working class and its history in the socio-historical explanation of the differences between welfare states. If cross-national differences in the gender policy of welfare states are to be explained, it does not suffice to analyse the development of the welfare state only as the result of conflicts and negotiation processes between the state, employers, and employee representatives. They also have to be seen as the result of negotiation processes between the genders. Due to such limitations of its explanatory power suggestions have been made for an extension of Esping-Andersen's approach. Orloff (1993: 307) suggested two further indicators for the classification of welfare states: the opportunity individuals /' Tayilo live auTbnombusly as parents, and access to paid_employment since access to the labour market enables women to secure their livelihood and therefore has an emancipatory effect. It thereforejias to be analysed in how far the state promotes gainful employment of women, 'the right to be commodified, if you will' (ibid.: 318). Such suggestions for an extension of Esping-Andersen's approach, however, face the dilemma that they are implicitly based on his theoretical foundation although that had been criticized as 'gender blind' (see also Duncan 1994, 1998a). Suggestions that type welfare states on the basis of the 'gender' structure category go a step further. Jane Lewis and Ilona Ostner (1994) developed a concept for the classification of welfare regimes from the gender perspective on the basis of the feminist critique of the resource-theoretical approach. The basis of their classification is welfare state policy with respect to women's position between family and employment system. Their typification orients with the extent to which the family model of the male breadwinner marriage is developed. Lewis and Ostner assume that the male breadwinner marriage, with a dependent wife doing unpaid work and with dependent children, is an element of the welfare state that varies in degree from country to country; this has consequences for women's labour force participation (ibid.: 1). The main difference is in how far women are treated not only as mothers but 18 Development of Culture, Welfare States and Women's Employment in Europe International Differences in Women's Labour Force Participation 19 '' also as gainfully employed persons. On this basis the authors distinguish between welfare states with strong, modified, or weak male breadwinner orientation. The classification depends on the relation between the public sphere of paid work and the private sphere of unpaid caring and on the assignment of men and women to these two spheres as well as on the role the welfare state plays in assuming tasks of social care. The authors cite a number of examples to show how variations in the degree to which policies oriented with the male breadwinner model cause differences in the welfare states' gender policies. This approach provides important starting points for the development of a theoretical model for an explanation of the differences in the institutional frameworks of female gainful employment. Its scope, however, is limited to welfare state policy; the connection with family and labour market structures is not covered. Moreover, the existing behavioural patterns of women are regarded as the result of welfare state policy while the question of the influence of other institutions and cultural values and notions is not pursued any further. Finally, the question should be asked whether the male breadwinner model is indeed the generally underlying pattern for gendered division of labour in European societies as this approach assumes. I will investigate these issues in Chapters 4 through 7 on the basis of an empirical survey. The argumentation of Christel Lane (1993) takes a similar direction as the approach by Lewis and Ostner. The author has studied the reasons for the differences in the patterns of female labour force participation between the three largest Western European societies: the United Kingdom, Germany, and France. Lane concentrated on the gender policy practice of the state. She found that each of the studied societies has a specific gender profile with respective effects on the structuring of the labour market along the lines of gender (ibid.: 274). The assumption of specific 'gender profiles' expressed in a specific orientation of government policy is an appropriate basis for cross-national comparison and resembles the approach of Lewis and Ostner. However this explanation of the development of women's labour force participation and of female part-time employment is also restricted to the level of the regulatory framework set by the state. Another type of approach studies how differences in the gender policy of the welfare state develop and which role the policy of collective actors plays in this respect. The importance of these approaches lies in the fact that they include an action-theoretical dimension in the comparison of the gender policies of welfare states. Jane Jenson (1988) analysed the history of government policy with respect to female gainful employment in France and the UK on the basis of maternity leave. She argued that the work experience of French women in the past century was characterized by their involvement in gainful employment while English women were systematically excluded from the same. When infant mortality dramatically rose at the end of the 19th century, different political discourses developed: in the UK this discourse was held under the condition that a woman's place was in the family and that gainful employment was not compatible with that role; in France, on the other hand, maternity leave was enacted at the beginning of the 20th century, which enabled mothers to engage in gainful employment. For Jenson this is evidence for her thesis that capitalist societies develop differing 'political discourses of gender' which generate differences in government policy.8 In the comparison she conducted Jensen explains this with the different contributions of trade union traditions to the political discourse about the relations of the genders in the two countries. As the French unions have traditionally been more egalitarian in nature, equality was emphasized in the discourse about the role of women to a greater extent than in England (Jenson 1988: 35). In this concept, differences in women's labour force participation, and especially the question whether women work part-time or full-time, are explained with the respective government policy as to female gainful employment, which is regarded as the result of the political discourse between organized capital and organized labour. In my opinion, an important aspect of this approach is that it includes the historical perspective and takes into account that government policies refer to collective discourses about gender relations. Collective patterns of women's labour force participation, however, are primarily regarded as an immediate reaction to government policy rather than something requiring a more complex explanation. A further approach that also deals with the contribution of collective actors to the gender policy of welfare states was developed by Giinther Schmid (1992). Schmid argued that female gainful employment was to a large extent due to the consequences of the (implicit) social contract with the help of which societies organize their welfare state and therefore also the labour market. Schmid's classification of government policies was based on two reference categories, namely wage settlement - which is reached either via the market or via negotiation processes between political and social forces - and job creation - either in the public or the private sector. From the four possible combinations of these two factors Schmid ideal-typically derived three scenarios or possible models of government policy: with respect to the model of the integrated free market the (implicit) social contract intends wages to be regulated by the market and the state hardly participates in the creation of new jobs. The effect on female gainful employment is low in this case. Gainful employment of women is at most promoted indirectly as due to the existence of a relatively large low-wage sector a comparatively high share of the resident population is forced into the formal labour market, which supports an increase in female gainful employment in the private sector. In contrast, the (implicit) social contract in the model of the integrated welfare state is based on the principle that all those gainfully employed have a right to a socially appropriate income, independent of their productivity and the market value of their work. Here the state significantly contributes to the creation of new jobs. This model involves a high rate of female employment. In the model of the disintegrated welfare state the wage system is also based on the postulate that all those gainfully employed are entitled to a socially appropriate income. Here the state does not significantly participate in the creation of new jobs, however, as it regards certain services as the responsibility of the private households and the informal sector. Due to their 'deviating' behaviour with regard to gainful employment women are structurally disadvantaged in this model. Schmid emphasizes that the policy of collective actors in the 'corporate triangle' is of central importance for government labour market policy and hence for the policy of the state with respect to women's integration in the labour market. According to this theoretical approach, women's labour market situation and their labour force participation are the result of general societal regulations regarding the way the state influences the labour market. The approach provides important starting Points for a differentiating description of the relations of state and labour market. Development of Culture, Welfare States and Women's Employment in Europe It enables a distinction between welfare states on the basis of the 'demand side' of the labour market as affected by the state and on the basis of jobs. Schmid considers that the way welfare states influence the development of the number of jobs orients with cultural models on the desirability of women's participation in gainful employment. For the question of the extent to which women participate in the labour force, however, the 'supply side' of the labour market and the influence of social policy on the labour market behaviour of women have to be taken into account as well." Lilja Mosesdottir (1996,2001) also emphasizes the importance of collective actors for government policy. From the outset the category 'gender' forms the centre of her approach. The author deals with the question of how the social forces can be identified that affect the nature of the state as a regulator of gender relations; she assigns particular importance to the women's movement. The state is here regarded as the producer and as the product of strategies. This approach takes into account that the strategies of collective actors not only refer to interests but also to cultural models. The relevance of the 'culture' dimension, however, is not explicitly described by this approach. The following conclusion can be drawn. The available theoretical approaches to the relationship of welfare state policy and gainful employment provide important starting points for a theoretical framework suitable for cross-national comparative research on the social integration of men and women. They allow a differentiating examination of the policy of the welfare state with respect to female gainful employment, an analysis of these policies as the result of the strategies of collective actors, and the consideration of their cultural foundations. These approaches do not suffice, however, to explain cross-national differences in women's labour force participation. The understanding of the relationship of structure and practice they are based on is often problematic. What is lacking is an elaborated theoretical approach to the way welfare state policy affects the behaviour of individuals and social groups. It is often implicitly assumed that welfare state policy immediately determines the behaviour of individuals and the aggregate behaviour was the result of welfare state policies. Hence it is frequently argued that institutional constraints were responsible when women are not engaged in gainful employment or work only part-time. This ignores the influence of cultural models and values on women's decisions as to gainful employment. Some approaches take these into account - in so far as they affect government policy. The way culture and institutions are correlated is not discussed, however; the approaches rather tend to stick to the 'myth of cultural integration' (Archer 1995). Furthermore, the complex interactions within the institutional system are often not sufficiently considered or theoretically described. And finally, in most approaches the conditions under which social and cultural change takes place remain unclear. Explanation with the Interaction of Institutions and Structures In the following I present theoretical approaches that provide starting points for an analysis and a comparison of the development of women's labour force participation in the context of the interrelations of social structures and institutions. International Differences in Women's Labour Force Participation 21 The 'Effet Societal' Approach Some institutional oriented attempts at an explanation refer to the effet societal approach of the French LEST, in Nancy, that was developed on the basis of a comparative German-French study of the connection of education and employment system (Lutz 1976, Maurice/Sellier/Silvestre 1986). According to its originators it is a methodological framework for international comparative research in labour market and employment sociology (Michon 1992). Maurice, Sellier and Silvestre (1986) argue that individual social elements cannot be analysed without taking their respective specific societal context into account. Hence social practice takes place in the context of specific institutions of a certain society which influence behaviour but which are also affected by the behaviour of social actors. Emphasis is here placed on the interactions of education and employment system on the one hand and the system of industrial relations on the other. According to the effet societal approach every society functions on the basis of unique interrelations of its institutions. An explanation of differences hence tries to identify a coherent system or a certain social logic in every country observed (Maurice 1991: 89). It is therefore required, so the argument goes, to choose a holistic approach to the comparative analysis of social phenomena that always keeps an eye on the connections between the various elements of a social system. The significance of social forms therefore differs with the societal context and can be analysed appropriately only when this context is included in the analysis. The approach contains important ideas for comparative research as it includes the context of the respective society in the comparison of developments in the sphere of work. Due to its assumption of coherence in the relations of institutions it is problematic, however. It also assigns relatively low weight to the importance of the role of social actors. For those reasons the approach has been criticized for its functionalistic and static view of society (Lane 1989). Neither does it consider the significance of cultural factors (Pfau-Effinger 1996). Although Marc Maurice later found that the approach has to be extended to include the aspect of cultural values, this did not result in its respective further development (Maurice 1995,2000). Despite the further development of the approach I think that issues such as the significance of social actors, breaks and inconsistencies and social change in the societal context, and the interactions of culture and institutions have so far not been sufficiently taken into account. I also think that the benefit of this approach for the comparison of societies is limited as it exclusively emphasizes the uniqueness of the country-specific context. Burkart Lutz (1993: 104) points out this problem: In the last instance the analytical recourse to the effet societal causes everything that originally seemed comparable to disappear in the respective national specificity of the conditions of society as a whole.10 As the approach places social phenomena in their societal context it provides important starting points also for cross-national comparison of labour market practice. Jill Rubery (1988) combined the approach of the effet societal with the approach of 'social reproduction' of the Cambridge Labour Studies Group. The latter had 22 Development of Culture, Welfare States and Women's Employment in Europe been developed as a more comprehensive approach in comparison to the original segmentation approach because of the considerable deficits of conventional labour market-theoretical theory formation with respect to people's employment patterns; it was to consider the social and political conditions of the labour market to a greater extent and more emphasis was to be placed on the supply side of labour (Wilkinson 1981, Craig et al. 1985). According to this concept the developments of the labour market are structured by the productive system on the one hand and by the system of 'social reproduction' on the other hand, which is relatively autonomous in comparison (Rubery 1988). These are, in accordance with the assumptions of the effet societal approach, specifically and uniquely connected in every society. On this basis the supply of female labour is constructed by a variety of social and political conditions and the prevailing attitudes of the population as to gainful employment of women are among them. With the help of this approach differences between countries in the development of the female labour market can be analysed on the basis of country-specific characteristics, Rubery applied this approach to explain cross-national differences in the development of part-time work (1988). Moreover, Jill Rubery and Colette Fagan (1993, 1995) argued that certain institutional structures such as the organization and industry structure of social production, labour market conditions and regulation, the education and vocational training system, and the dominant cultural attitudes and values including attitudes to gender roles were decisive for cross-national differences in the gender-specific segregation of the labour market. At the end of the 1980s the approach represented an important step in the development of labour market theory as it included the demand side and the supply side of the labour market into analyses of the development of new forms of employment such as part-time work. What I regard as unsatisfactory is the way Rubery treats the relationship of demand and supply side in her comparative analysis on part-time employment. According to the argument, companies - based on their market-related economic interests - determine the working-hour model under which women are employed. The economic interests of companies depend on the respective legal regulations as to part-time work and the tax incentives and restrictions with respect to part-time employment (Rubery 1988: 262, 277). This view neglects the effect the supply side of the labour market has on companies' employment policy. Actually, the working hour preferences of the employees in one segment may be a central issue from the outset when companies select from the available employment policy instruments/Empirical studies for West Germany have shown that many part-time jobs are not created out of companies' independent economic interests but exclusively as a reaction to the supply side, in order to keep hold of female workers with company-specific qualifications who would otherwise quit their jobs and look for a new one because of their preference for part-time work (Wiesenthal 1997). It is therefore important to analyse the preferences of workers as to part-time employment and how these change and which social developments affect them. The relation of restrictions and options of the employment system on the one hand and the behavioural patterns of individuals on the 'supply side' on the other hand should be elaborated. The fact that negotiation processes in the context of industrial relations play a decisive role with respect to the design of jobs should be considered as well. International Differences in Women's Labour Force Participation 23 Fagan and O'Reilly also suggested a comparative analysis of part-time work on the basis of the effet societal approach (O'Reilly 1996: 11; Fagan/O'Reilly 1997a). Anne Marie Daune-Richard (1997) referred to this approach to explain differences in part-time employment of women in France, the U.K., and Sweden. She describes the respective 'social configuration' from which part-time work originated and spread to a greater or lesser extent. The problem of how the - sometimes contradictory -interrelations between the various levels are to be conceptualized, how change can be explained and compared, and how differences can be explained without limiting the argumentation to national characteristics has so far not been satisfactorily solved on the theoretical level. Differing Paths toward the Service Society Hartmut HauBermann and Walter Siebel assume that cross-national differences in the development of women's labour force participation are of central importance for the explanation of cross-national differences in the way modern Western industrial societies transform into service societies. Although the subject of their study is primarily the development of the service society and not the attempt to explain international differences in women's labour force participation, the approach can provide important impetus for the conceptualization of a framework for the explanation of such differences. The study focuses on the development of the economies of modern Western societies towards service economies. HauBermann and Siebel assume that this development is characterized by women's increasing integration in gainful employment and by the fact that in the course of this considerable shares of unpaid work in the household are professionalized and integrated in the formal employment system where these tasks are then again carried out by women. The way into the service society is the way of women into the system of professionally organized work.1' According to the authors, the ways societies take into the service society differ. These differences depend to a considerable extent on the success of women's full integration in employment. They argue that the extent to which women are integrated in employment depends primarily on the development of consumption services, especially social services as these are tasks that are culturally constructed as 'female' and hence move together with the women from the households into the employment system. The authors regard the respective development of social services as the result of the interplay of cultural traditions, welfare state policy, and companies' practice. On the basis of a comparison of the development in the USA, Sweden, and West Germany they differentiate three paths into service society that differ mainly with respect to whether the market, the welfare state, or the family are primarily responsible for the production of social services. The authors point out the significance of the enlargement of the public supply of social services for a way towards women's integration into gainful employment that leads to greater equality in the gender relations. 24 Development of Culture. Welfare States and Women 's Employment in Europe The economic development is here not presented as a quasi-autonomous process determining all other processes of change but the interactions of social and political development processes and the development of the labour market are illustrated and conceptualized. Hence the approach of HauBermann and Siebel offers important starting points for the analysis of the connection of tertiarization and the development of women's labour force participation. As the subject of their work is a different one, it does not include an analysis of the contradictory dynamics in the development of the relation of cultural values and ideals on the one hand and institutional policies on the other hand nor of the development of women's orientation as to gainful employment that takes place in this context. Differing Stages of the Patriarchal Order as an Explanation On the basis of the 'patriarchy' concept Sylvia Walby (1990, 1994) developed a conflict-theoretical approach, which she further developed into a theoretical framework for comparative analyses of gender structures. Her theory follows the tradition of 'dualistic' theories of the socialist-feminist tradition. This means that she assumes a specific interaction of patriarchal and capitalist social structures. She further assumes that there is a comprehensive patriarchal system which is defined as a 'system of social structures and practices in which men dominate, oppress and exploit women' (Walby 1990: 20). The dominance of men results from their control of societal resources. Hence men control the work of women in the family as well as in the employment system. Walby applies this approach to the description of regional and international differences in gender relations. There are six dimensions with regard to the extent of patriarchal dominance: paid work, unpaid work, estate, male violence, sexuality, and culture. Walby further differentiates between different forms of patriarchy: one is the private form in which women are assigned to the private sphere of the family and exploited by 'their' male breadwinner, and the other is the public form in which women are exploited either by the collective of men in gainful employment or by the state - it depends. According to Walby each of the two main forms of patriarchy can be classified by the degree patriarchal structures are realized. With respect to gainful employment the share of women working full-time is used as an indicator for the degree of women's independence or - from the opposite perspective - for the degree of patriarchal dominance. In this approach, social change in the relations between the genders is regarded as change between private and public patriarchy on the one hand and as change in the degree of patriarchy on the other hand (ibid.). In the early 1990s Walby's studies contributed to the further development of the theoretical framework for research into the work of women as the patriarchal-theoretical assumptions are much more elaborated here than in earlier feminist theories. An important dimension this approach emphasizes is the dimension of power relations. However, I regard the usefulness of this approach as a basis for international comparative research into women's labour force participation as limited because it raises a number of theoretical problems. 1 First of all, the action-theoretical dimension is hardly taken into account/ Women as social actors are systematically excluded in this concept. When they act it is for International Differences in Women's Labour Force Participation 25 the most part only as organized women's movements - as Walby explained in a further development of her patriarchal-theoretical approach (Walby 1997). 2 As the role of social actors is not systematically developed in this theory it remains unclear how social change can be brought about (see also Duncan 1995a). 3 Moreover, cultural values and models do not play a role in this theory. Culture is restricted to the level of institutionalized production of culture in the media, etc., and is only one of the six gender structures in Walby's approach. With respect to Walby's cross-national comparative analyses this generates problematic interpretations. The analysis of women's labour force participation and female part-time employment does not take into account that these social phenomena may have different meanings in different institutional and cultural settings (see also O'Reilly 1996, Fagan/O'Reilly 1997b, Bang/Jensen/Pfau-Effinger 2000). 4 If it is assumed that the significance of social phenomena can vary in the comparison of societies, the assumption of a continuum of more/less patriarchy in each of the six underlying dimensions - derived from indicators such as women's labour force participation - is also problematic. 5 The way the dimension of 'power' is treated in this theory is problematic as well. It remains unclear why it should always be men who have a monopoly on the important resources and why the resources available to men should always be superior to those women have. The value of resources is always constructed by society. Therefore the issue of the value of resources that are available to certain social groups and its cultural and social genesis should enter the theoretical framework as an open question. 6 The treatment of 'paid work' (gainful employment) and 'unpaid work' (housework) as relatively 'autonomous substructures' of patriarchy seems also problematic. In this regard research on women's issues has often argued that it is actually the combination of both forms of work, their connection and their complementary character, which is constitutive for the situation of women in society. This finds expression in central terms and approaches of gender research: in the terms 'gendered division of labour', 'dual socialization' of women (Becker-Schmidt 1985), 'female human capital' (Beck-Gernsheim/Ostner 1978), 'everyday life of women' (Jurczyk/ Rerrich 1993), 'dual life planning' (Geissler/ Oechsle 1996) and in social-constructivist approaches (see West/Fenstermaker 1995, FenstermakerAVest/Zimmennann 1991). They emphasize not only the ' separation of both spheres of action, which is accompanied by gender segregation, but also their combination in the everyday lives and biographies of women. These theories assume that the structural allocation of women to both social spheres, family and gainful employment, and the specific combination of these two spheres in the biographies and everyday lives of women are of fundamental significance for the behaviour and the chances of women on the labour market. All these approaches argue that those persons who assume the tasks of the household and of child raising suffer structural disadvantages on the labour market. Hence a comparative analysis of women's labour market behaviour has to take the family situation of women and the work they perform there into account. 26 Development of Culture, Welfare States and Women's Employment in Europe International Differences in Women's Labour Force Participation 27 Walby's theory is actually rather a classification of forms of gender relations than an explanation. Altogether it remains open why there is private and a public patriarchy and under which conditions social change takes place. John Machines (1998) also has tried to explain cross-national differences with respect to the differing degrees of integration of men and women in the labour market with the help of a patriarchal-theoretical approach. In contrast to Walby he assumes that the development goes in the direction of gender equality. According to Maclnnes, such tendencies correspond to an inherent logic of capitalist development as capitalism undermines patriarchy in the course of its development. Gender was a form of conservative ideology that evolved only during the transition to the capitalist society. It was invented by men in order to defend the financial and ideological heritage of patriarchy against the sexually equalizing tendencies of capitalism that are due to the granting of individual rights (1998: 228). Maclnnes explains cross-national differences in women's labour force participation with capital having undermined patriarchy to different extents in different countries: I have argued that we can understand inequality between men and women in terms of the extent to which the dynamics of modernity have undermined the previously existing patriarchal orders in various countries, (ibid.: 240) The approach offers an interesting new perspective with regard to the relationship of capitalism and social inequality in the gender relations. It provides for that chance that there are trends in social development which transcend the existing structures of gender inequality. In principle, the approach is based on the assumption that everywhere the development of gender relations takes place according to the same pattern. In the end, differences are shown only on a one-dimensional scale of different degrees of social erosion of patriarchal structures. However, it is not clear why and in how far the erosion of patriarchy, expressed in cultural change, takes different routes in different countries. The 'Gender Order'Approach The theory of the 'gender order' by Connell (198 7, 1996) was a further development of theory formation regarding the structure of the gender relations. Already in the 1980s the Australian sociologist developed a dynamic theoretical approach for the analysis of gender relations in the historical and social comparison. He did not design his theory explicitly as a framework for cross-national comparative analyses, though.12 The basis of his theory is explained in the book Gender and Power (1987). He refers to Giddens' (1979, 1984) 'theory of duality and structure' which is based on the theoretical assumption that there are close links between the behaviour of social actors and the reproduction and change of social structures. With regard to the relations between the genders Connell differentiates three substructures that interact in the 'gender regimes' of the individual institutions. These three structures are division of labour, power, and 'cathexis'. i.e. emotional and sexual relations. Connell emphasizes that although the three structures are relatively autonomous they are on the other hand also closely linked. What differs are the respective dominant ordering principles: the most important organization principle of the division of labour is separation or division; the principle effective in power structures on the other hand is that of unequal integration (Connell 1987: 97). In the 'gender regime' of the respective institution the power relations, the division of labour, and the emotional and social relations between men and women are respectively formed in a specific way by the social practice of the actors. With the term 'gender order' Connell describes the connection of all social institutions, the interaction of the substructures of the individual institutions, and the institutions' dynamics of change. Connell draws an analogy to the composition of a piece for an orchestra: just like a composition it is continuously reproduced and restaged. It is a unity - always imperfect and under construction - of historical composition. I mean 'composition' as in music: a tangible, active and often difficult process of bringing elements into connection with each other and thrashing out their relationships. It is a matter of the real historical process of interaction and group formation. ... The product of the process is not a logical unity but an empirical unification. It happens on particular terms in particular circumstances. At the level of a whole society it produces the gender order, (ibid: 116) Tensions and conflicts between the actors may occur in the 'gender regime' when the actors' interests have changed due to processes of social change on other social levels. In my opinion, the way Connell differentiated between the various social levels, structures, and the social practice of actors was a vital contribution to theory formation in gender research. It provided many starting points for international comparative research. He treated housework and gainful employment as complementary structures within the scope of the 'division of labour' structure, so the important links between the social spheres of gainful employment and family can be taken into account. I also think it appropriate to separate 'power' as individual structure from the division of labour. Actually there are many examples supporting the assumption that relations of power may to a certain degree be independent of the form of division of labour and that they also develop independently of the latter to a certain extent (see., for example, Pyke 1994). Although Cormell's approach contributed substantially to the further development of existing theoretical approaches to gendered division of labour and to power relations, it does not satisfy in every respect: 1 I further think that the 'gender order' has been insufficiently conceptualized by Connell. The three substructures come into play primarily when he deals with the gender regimes of the individual institutions. This neglects those structures which are not within institutions but comprehensively link the different social spheres or institutions and which are relevant for the gender relations. This is especially the case for the social division of labour between private household and gainful employment. 28 Development of Culture, Welfare States and Women's Employment in Europe 2 The significance of cultural factors plays only a very small role in this approach. Therefore it is not made clear what the conditions are under which a common ground is found between the gender regimes in the numerous individual institutions. In this respect I think the analogy of gender order and 'composition' does not really work. The composition of a piece of music is generally based on an idea about its basic character: the composer first of all determines what kind of music it is going to be, a waltz, a jazz piece or an oratorio. With regard to gender order Connell does not intend such a 'central idea' connecting the individual gender structures in the gender regimes of the many individual institutions. In contrast, I assume that every gender order is based on a specific complex of 'central ideas' as to gender relations which we can refer to when we ask about the cultural foundation of a gender order (see Chapter 3). When we take a closer look at Connell's concept of the relationship of structure and culture we find a kind of basis-superstructure construction corresponding to arguments in the Marxist tradition. According to Connell there are certain gender structures that produce a certain cultural superstructure in accordance with the Marxist principle that social existence determines consciousness. He regards these structures as given and the cultural constructs as generated by these structures - they are a kind of add-on. According to his argumentation, the existing structures are the reason for the respective construction of femininity and masculinity (e.g. Connell 1987: 182). Although Connell confirms that change on the cultural level can also cause changes in the structures this is not a systematic element of his approach; he generally defines structures as the 'primary' element. Moreover, the significance of 'culture' for the gender relations remains rather vague and is not systematically studied. On the level of society as a whole the approach is based on just one element: the assumption of a global dominance of men over women (ibid.: 183). This argumentation is problematic as it ignores the various differences, interdependencics and possible discrepancies in the relationship of culture and the behaviour of institutional, collective, and individual actors. In a more recent paper Connell added a further structure to his three gender structures - that of 'symbolization', which represents a step towards a consideration of the cultural dimension (Connell 1996). It remains unclear, however, what this exactly means and what the nature of the interrelations with the other social levels is. The 'Gender Contract' Approach A different route is taken by the 'gender contract' approach. The term 'contract' has been controversially discussed in the feminist discourse and its meaning varies in different national contexts and theoretical approaches (see Siim 1993: 47). The 'gender contract' approach I here refer to originates from the Scandinavian discourse and was mainly used by the Swede Hirdman for her analysis of the historical development of gender relations (Hirdman 1988, 1990). With reference to the 'social democratic contract' between capital and labour she presents a theoretical concept of medium range that so far had been developed by her only as an analytical framework for the study of the historical development of gender relations but was used also as a International Differences in Women's Labour Force Participation 29 theoretical concept for spatial comparative analyses (Pfau-Effinger 1993, 1994a, b, 1995, Duncan 1994, Forsberg/Gonas/Perrons 1999). The theoretical foundation is her approach of the 'gender system' (genussystemet), which she uses as the theoretical approach for a description of the nature of gender relations in a society. The gender system is a structuring, dynamic system that classifies people according to two basic principles into social gender categories; practically all spheres of life are subdivided into gender categories. This division is hierarchical and the masculine is regarded as the standard; the social status of the feminine is below that of the masculine. This gender system is maintained and reproduced on three levels: on the level of a cultural superstructure with normative views and cultural values for gender, on the level of social integration in institutions such as the labour market, and on the level of socialization, the learning of gender roles. With the approach of the 'gender contract' (genuskontrakf) Hirdman operationalizes her approach of the gender system and brings in the level of actors. According to Hirdman, every society and every time develops a contract between the genders. This contains specific agreements about what people of different genders are to do, think, and be on the level of the cultural superstructure, that of social integration, and on the level of socialization.13 The gender system therefore varies in space and time, both with respect to the nature of the gender contract and the degree of its rigidity. Hirdman uses the term 'gender contract' to express the general structural forces of segregation and hierarchy in the gender relations. Hirdman's theory provided an important basis for the development of a theoretical framework for the present work (see also Pfau-Effinger 1993,1994a, b). She includes the level of social actors and her approach allows an analysis of tensions and contradictions between the various social levels so that the dynamics of social change in the gender relations can be described. Nevertheless, some objections have to be raised: 1 The combination of structure-theoretical and contract-theoretical assumptions creates inconsistencies within the theory. On the level of the 'gender system' a validity of certain cultural principles - that of difference and of hierarchy -beyond space and time is assumed. Then again on the level of the 'gender contract' she postulates that gender structures can be changed by the behaviour of social actors. This should be assumed in relation to the cultural ideas about difference and hierarchy, which in her approach, however, represent the foundation of the gender system that applies always and everywhere. 2 Furthermore, the argument that the separation of genders is per se always accompanied by female subordination does not seem very plausible. The extent of the gendered division of the life spheres and the degree to which the separation is hierarchical should enter the theory as variables. 3 Altogether the theoretical framework is insufficiently developed. The empirical analyses in which Hirdman studied the development of Swedish gender contracts in the 20th century are more elaborated and extensive in comparison. In her theoretical framework, for example, individual behaviour appears only as 'socialization in gender-specific roles' and therefore only as one that reproduces the existing system while the empirical analyses also point out the contribution of women's everyday practice to social change. In the theoretical framework Development of Culture, Welfare States and Women's Employment in Europe individuals' behaviour seems determined by the respective 'gender contract', hence social change takes place only on the level of negotiation processes of collective actors while the contribution of the majority of individual actors to social and cultural change is not taken into account. Although Hirdman's theory of the 'gender contract' doubtlessly represents an important improvement in theory formation as to the comparative analysis of gendered division of labour (see also Duncan 1995a, b), its potential for providing some insight is limited to a certain extent. Context-related Approaches Taking Cultural Factors into Account Hakim in her approach of a 'preference theory' (1999, 2001) has argued that differences in the attitudes of different groups of women towards part-time work can be explained by different cultural orientations in relation to family and occupational career. According to Hakim, three groups of women can be distinguished who differ in the quality of their orientation towards waged work. One group of women, she argues, orient towards full-time work and a professional career, and the other group of women orient towards motherhood, the family, and part-time work, while a third group is most diverse and includes 'women who want to combine work and family, plus drifters and unplanned careers' (Hakim 1999: 51). Although Hakim's work has been criticized (for example by Crompton and Harris 1998), she has made an important contribution to the analysis of motherhood insofar as she considers that women are competent actors who pursue their own life plans with respect to the way they combine waged work and motherhood. What is not clear in Hakim's argument is why women choose different strategies in combining waged work and a family. It is not clear why these three distinctly different groups of women have developed, and why an individual woman decides for one or the other. In contrast, I argue that differences in the employment orientations of women are connected to cultural ideals about gender, the family and motherhood at the macro level ot society, and can be understood only by analysing these interrelations. I doubt, however, that part-time work of mothers in general is connected to life plans that one-sidedly refer to a 'marriage career' (Hakim 1997: 43) rather than a professional career. A temporary phase of part-time work during active motherhood can be an element of a professional career biography of women, as is often the case in professional service jobs of women in West Germany (Quack 1993). The role of part-time work of mothers varies with the societal context, the cultural and institutional framework for motherhood and waged work. indi vidualUnCan Edwards (1997'19")have stressed the central role of culture for emnlovm T^h t^'r cross_reg'onal research on how single mothers combine approach to thee U|'lpa'