The Century of the Gender Revolution

THECENTURYOFTHEGENDERREVOLUTION EMPIRICAL ESSAYS by øyvind søraas skorge A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Government of the London School of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy October 2016 London For Jenny, and for Cora may she grow up in a world where one’s gender has ceased to affect one’s life opportunities 2 DECLARATION certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for I the PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work, with the exception of Chapter 4, which was co-authored with Henning Finseraas. I certify that the theoretical, empirical, and written work for this chapter was carried out by both authors (Finseraas did 30 percent and I did 70 percent of the work). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 63,139 words. 3 Helmer: First and foremost, you are a wife and mother. Nora: That I don’t believe anymore. I believe that first and foremost I am an individual, just as you are. —Henrik Ibsen, A Doll’s House, 1879 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS homas hobbes depicted life without a Leviathan state as “soli- T tary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” Some would say the same about being a doctoral candidate. Although there is some truth to this, owing to my supervisors, friends, and colleagues, the experience of writing a thesis has foremost been solidary instead of solitary, rich instead of poor, nice instead of nasty, and beamish instead of brutish. Short it has still been, yet not too short. I first wish to thank my supervisors, David Soskice and Jonathan Hopkin. The many long conversations with David, not only about my thesis, but also about how the social world hangs together more gen- erally, have been invaluable to my work. His never-ending curiosity, thoughtful comments, good humor, hospitality, and warm support have made the doctoral journey a truly enriching one. From my first day at the lse, Jonathan’s interest, involvement, and insights has im- proved my work in innumerable ways. His eagerness to use research to address social inequalities is a constant source of inspiration. I have also been standing on the shoulders of many friends and colleagues. Thanks to Magnus B. Rasmussen, for all the comments, suggestions, criticisms, and encouragements, from the point where this thesis was a few loose thoughts on a single sheet of paper to the 4 point where it took its final form. To Henning Finseraas, for seam- less cooperation and for demonstrating why science is best seen as a collaborative exercise. To Laura Bronner, for countless comments on numerous attempts to write something sensible, and for all the laugh- ters throughout the years in Oxford and London. To Jack Blumenau, for being such a superb sparring partner. To Nicola Mastrorocco, for passionately influencing me to see “science as a vocation.” To Dave Hope, for dragging me out of the library and into the pub. To Bastian Betthäuser and Mihika Chatterjee, for always being there, and for so many motivating conversations over the years. To Tore Wig, Aksel Braanen Sterri, Emil Aas Stoltenberg, Per Anders Langerød, Anders Ravik Jupskås and Ørjan Skår for repeatedly being up for dinners served with intriguing discussions when I was back home in Nor- way. And to my family, for staying close throughout the years of long distance. I enjoyed presenting bits and pieces of this thesis across Europe and the United States. Beyond those already mentioned, a number of scholars, whose work I admire, have provided challenging and ex- tremely useful comments on my work. Particularly, I wish to thank Dawn Teele and Jon H. Fiva, who both provided detailed comments and suggestions to Chapter 2. For feedback on various parts of the thesis, I also wish to thank (in alphabetical order): Elin Allern, Ben Ansell, Cathy Boone, Charlotte Cavaillé, Ali Cirone, Andy Eggers, Robert Ely, Gro Hagemann, Peter A. Hall, John Hills, Minda Holm, Bjørn Høyland, Carsten Jensen, Francesca Refsum Jensenius, An- dreas Kotsadam, Carl-Henrik Knutsen, Nikki Lacey, Ben Lauderdale, Cathie Jo Martin, Mona Morgan-Collins, Thomas Piketty, Nelson A. Ruiz-Guarin, Mike Savage, and Mark Thatcher. In Norway, where I carried out some of the data gathering and analysis for this thesis, the Institute for Social Research (isf) gener- 5 ously provided me with an office space, free coffee, and a stimulat- ing research environment. It is a true privilege to take up the posi- tion as a senior researcher at the isf from August 2016. Many of my new colleagues have provided challenging and valuable comments to many parts of the thesis: Johannes Bergh, Sarah Cools, Sigtona Halrynjo, Stine Hesstvedt, Axel West Pedersen, Liza Reisel, Jo Saglie, Hege Skjeie, Marte Strøm, and Mari Teigen. To finish a doctoral thesis is memorable. To see your daughter enter the world is unequalled. Above all, I therefore wish to thank Jenny Sandvig love of my life, best friend, terrific thinker, and sharp- witted reader. Without her, there would be no thesis. I cannot wait to be the leaving-taking dad while the talented one of us returns to work. This thesis is dedicated to Jenny, and to our daughter Cora. 6 ABSTRACT he inclusion of women in the public sphere delineates the last T century from the previous ones. This thesis investigates three key aspects of the gender revolution. At the turn from the 18th to the 19th century, countries began to grant women equal voting rights to men. Equality in the act of voting, however, failed to ensue. To address this conundrum, the first essay argues that elites and organizations had greater incentives to mobi- lize women to vote under a proportional representation (pr) than a plurality electoral system. I test the argument empirically by study- ing a reform which required half of the about 600 Norwegian municipalities to replace plurality with pr before the 1919 election. The difference-in-difference design reveals the reform increased women’s share of the votes cast by about ten percentage points, thus notably reducing gender inequities in political participation. Women’s inclusion in voting did, however, not imply women’s inclusion in employment, education, and political offices. Indeed, after World War II, the social partners and political parties favored policies aimed at male-breadwinner families. The second essay studies the puzzle of why unions, employers, and parties nonetheless, from the 1970s and onwards, went from opposing to proposing work-family policy reforms, such as daycare services and paid parental leave. My argument is that, as women have become an increasingly important part of the membership base for unions and source of high-skilled 7 labour for employers, the social partners have come to push for the expansion of work-family policies. Yet, centralised corporatist institutions, which give policy influence, are needed for unions and employers to succeed with their policy demands. Both a time-series cross- national quantitative analysis and an in-depth case study of Norway and shadow case studies of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Sweden support the argument. By the new millennium, women made up half of the labor force but only one-third of managers, indicating that significant gender inequities remain. The third essay therefore examines whether the introduction of full-time daycare services increase mothers’ possibility and willingness to invest a professional career. Empirically, the essay exploits a staggered, large-scale expansion of daycare centres across Norwegian municipalities in the 2000s. Analysing registry data on the whole Norwegian population, the instrumental variable estimates indicate that the availability of daycare services made women more likely to enter into occupations requiring longer hours and leadership positions. In sum, the thesis demonstrates that reforms of political and public policy institutions can impact both the pace and the direction of the ongoing gender revolution. 8 CONTENTS Declaration 3 Acknowledgments 4 Abstract 7 List of Figures 10 List of Tables 12 1 introduction: the century of the gender revolution 15 2 proportional politics: electoral institutions and women’s share of the vote in the early twentieth century 53 3 partnering change: the politics of work-family policies 94 4 care for career: mothers, toddlers, and the impact of universal daycare on female leadership 157 5 conclusions 194 A appendix to chapter 1: proportional politics 211 B appendix to chapter 2: partnering change 220 C appendix to chapter 3: care for career 250 bibliography 269 9 LISTOFFIGURES Figure 2.1 The distribution, mean and interquartile range of women’s percentage of votes cast across municipalities for each election. 75 Figure 2.2 Women’s share of total turnout in Norwegian municipal elections, 1910-1928. 79 Figure 2.3 Leads and lags of the effect of changing to PR in 1919. 82 Figure 2.4 Percentage of municipalities with at least one woman in the municipal council, 1910- 1928. 86 Figure 3.1 Gross enrollment rates in tertiary education, with countries ordered according to when the female outnumbered the male enrollment rate. The vertical lines indicate the year of the rever- sal of the gender gap in enrollment. 103 Figure 3.2 Cross-national variation in total union density and the percentage of women union members in the 2000s 108 Figure 3.3 Daycare coverage, average weekly daycare at- tendance, and the gender gap in higher education across thirteen European countries in 2013.

Load more