Åsa Gunnarsson

Structuralism versus Individualism in Swedish Gender Equality Policy and Law

AsAnneHellum noted in her earlier position paper on the equality and anti-discrimination reform in Norway, to which wemake a Swedish sequel, the Nordic countries are on the top of World Economic Forum’s Gap index (Hellum, 2017; Global Gender Gap Report, 2017). Sweden now ranks fifth but has ceded its fourth place to Rwanda, after continuously maintaining its overall ranking for eight years in a row. Sweden maintains a strong position on the Economic Participation and Opportunity sub-index but does less well on the Health and Survival sub-index, where it sees its small but persistent gender gap in healthy life expectancy widening (Svensson & Gunnarsson, 2012). As we have discussed in earlier writings, the distinct Swedish policy of gender equality is both comprehensive and progressive; the policy has been closely intertwined with social democratic welfare-state ideology and is based on a structural understanding of equality. The policy is reflected in explicit and extensive legislation promoting gender equality. The legislation consists of constitutional provisions, anti-discrimination rules, and, perhaps more importantly, a variety of active legal measures (Svensson & Gunnarsson, 2012). At the same time, as we will come back to, we find reasons to criticize Swedish gender equality policy and law for not being radical enough. One of them is the sliding transformation from a structural understanding of gender inequalities to a more individualistic approach. The present overarching goal of Sweden’s national gender equality policy, introduced in 2006, is that women andmen are to have the same power to shape society and their own lives. The previous overarching goal, introduced in the late 1980s, about equal rights, opportunities, and responsibilities for men and women, was at the same time transformed to precondition for achieving the new objective. The background for the gender equality policy, which was made explicit in the wordings of the goal introduced in 2006, is an acknowledgement of a structural understanding of gender (in)equality according to the theory of the gender system, developed by the historian Yvonne Hirdman and introduced in a parliamentary context through her study of power and democracy in Sweden (Hirdman, 1990) [and add hyperlink to reference list]. The two main principles in the gender system are the segregation of the sexes and the prioritization of the male. The segregation assumes that men and women are perceived as either male or female and as each other’s opposites. The segregation is both horizontal, when men and women appear in different professions and sectors, and vertical,

Eliminating the secondary earner bias : Policy lessons from the introduction of partial individual taxation in Sweden in 1971

Abstract This paper examines the different elements included in the Swedish partial individual taxation reform in 1971. The purpose is to identify what policy lessons this reform holds for contemporary tax policy in the European Union member states that currently apply joint tax and benefit provisions. Even though contemporary circumstances have changed in relation to the historical context for Swedish reform, the common strand is that the provisions create both inactivity incentives on the labor market and low income traps for secondary earners. We suggest that a shift to individual taxation should be a part of family and social policies that promote gender equality, and that in turn should be consolidated within a sustainable idea about tax fairness.

Gender Equality and Taxation in the European Union : Study for the FEMM Committee

This study provides an overview over gender aspects in taxation at Member State and EU level. After an outline of gender gaps in socioeconomic realities across Member States, relevant for taxation, ...