Towards gender equality in European employment policy

At the Lisbon Summit in 2000, the European Council set for the first time a separate target of 60% for female employment in addition to the existing target of 70% for male and female (overall) employment. The employment gap between women and men has tended to hover around 20 percentage points in the EU. In 2000, women's employment rate was 54.0% and men's 72.5%. Increasing female employment is therefore the most challenging goal in European employment policy (Joint Employment Report, 2001).

From the gender perspective, the increased female employment is a challenge for economic equality, equal independence and autonomy both for women and men. However, this is not the main argument for gender equality in the EU. Welfare states need higher employment rates among the working-age population because of the need to guarantee a sustainable economy as well as the financing of the welfare states in the future. The dual breadwinner model may be more effective than one earner model in preventing poverty during social risk situations such as unemployment and sickness (Employment in Europe, 1994, pp 140-2; Haataja, 1999).

Ageing populations and decreasing fertility rates pose a threat for the future survival and development of welfare states. Female employment has increased at the same time as fertility rates have decreased in many countries. Comparing trends from the early 1970s until the early 1990s, female employment has increased simultaneous with fertility rates only in the Nordic countries (Hoem, 1993; Background Document, 1999; Rønsen, 1999). One explanation of this exceptional development may be that in the Nordic countries, investment in social policies, especially in the area of policies that help to reconcile work and child rearing, was increased during the 1970s and 1980s. Secondly, individualised taxation and social rights were one part of this progress, developing family leave entitlements the second part. Thirdly, the introduction and expansion of public daycare schemes during this period was perhaps the best explanation of the Nordic phenomenon. If this conclusion is right, the Nordic case is a good example of the meaning of social policy as a ‘productive factor’. As Escobedo (1999, p 176) has pointed out, we should take into account the costs and benefits of both the availability and the absence of reconciling policies.