Convergence of gender roles in a globalized world: international comparison of family and gender roles

This paper examines emerging and changing gender roles in different regions of the world. Using data on 12 countries from last three ISSP Special Modules “Family and Changing Gender Roles” (1994, 2002 and 2012), we compare the evolution of gender roles about motherhood and fatherhood and its relation with the extension of women as breadwinners around the world: four Western Europe countries, representatives of different models of Welfare State (Germany, United Kingdom, Norway and Spain) plus United States, three former Soviet nations (Russia, Poland and Czech Republic), two Latin American countries (Chile and Mexico) and two Asian nations (Japan and Taiwan). Data show that family change (measured both in terms of attitudes and social practices) is spreading from Western contexts to other regions of the world, although the pace of this change varies from one country to another, depending on cultural, economic and political factors.

Composite Indicators for the Family Change: ‘Familism' vs ‘Individualism' in the International Context

The aim of this paper is to propose a composite indicator to measure ‘familism’, conformed by two main dimensions: values on one hand (duty to take care of the family, importance of the family, sacrifices for the family...) and behaviours, on the other (predominance of married couples instead of cohabitant couples, high frequency of contact among members, family support…). In contrast to this idea of ‘familism’ we find that of individualism, that defends the independence of family members, tolerance to new family models, cohabitation instead of marriage,… , that implies less frequency of interaction among relatives and more governmental intervention towards children and elderly care. We observe that a higher degree of ‘familism’ does not always match with a lower degree of individualism when both dimensions, attitudes and behaviours, are considered. For instance, we find countries which are individualist in values but not in behaviours (such as Spain), whilst others, such as Japan, are ‘familist’ both in values and behaviours and finally, others, such as Sweden, are individualist with regards to both perspectives. We propose two different methodological approaches to the question. First, we use microdata from the Family, Work and Gender Roles module of the International Social Survey Programme-ISSP (years 1994, 2002 and 2012), in which 45 countries have participated. Information for the three rounds is collected for 17 countries with very different family values and welfare systems (for instance, Sweden, Japan, Russia, Spain, United Kingdom or the United States). From this data source, we create a first index on familism that can be related to individual sociodemographic characteristics. Second, we complete it through the inclusion of macro data (such as the divorce rate per country), in order to refine comparison at a country level by adding new variables to the previous index.

Composite Indicators for the Family Change: ‘Familism' vs ‘Individualism' in the International Context

The aim of this paper is to propose a composite indicator to measure ‘familism’, conformed by two main dimensions: values on one hand (duty to take care of the family, importance of the family, sacrifices for the family...) and behaviours, on the other (predominance of married couples instead of cohabitant couples, high frequency of contact among members, family support…). In contrast to this idea of ‘familism’ we find that of individualism, that defends the independence of family members, tolerance to new family models, cohabitation instead of marriage,… , that implies less frequency of interaction among relatives and more governmental intervention towards children and elderly care. We observe that a higher degree of ‘familism’ does not always match with a lower degree of individualism when both dimensions, attitudes and behaviours, are considered. For instance, we find countries which are individualist in values but not in behaviours (such as Spain), whilst others, such as Japan, are ‘familist’ both in values and behaviours and finally, others, such as Sweden, are individualist with regards to both perspectives. We propose two different methodological approaches to the question. First, we use microdata from the Family, Work and Gender Roles module of the International Social Survey Programme-ISSP (years 1994, 2002 and 2012), in which 45 countries have participated. Information for the three rounds is collected for 17 countries with very different family values and welfare systems (for instance, Sweden, Japan, Russia, Spain, United Kingdom or the United States). From this data source, we create a first index on familism that can be related to individual sociodemographic characteristics. Second, we complete it through the inclusion of macro data (such as the divorce rate per country), in order to refine comparison at a country level by adding new variables to the previous index.

Welfare Policies and Solidarity Toward the Elderly

In this paper we analyze the effect of welfare policies oriented toward the elderly on solidarity toward the elderly in a sample of European countries. The research question is whether more generous welfare policies crowd out solidarity. For this purpose, we analyze four waves of the SHARE database. We use multilevel analysis to estimate the effect of national variables on transfers toward the elderly, controlling for individual level variables. At the national level we focus on the effect of public spending on policies oriented toward the elderly after controlling for some other relevant variables, such as the proportion of elderly people, female labor force participation and unemployment. Our results indicate that expenditure in social protection toward the elderly has a positive and significant (albeit moderate) effect on the economic support received by the elderly (which is in line with the Crowding-in hypothesis). However, in the case of time transfers, we find that expenditure in social protection toward the elderly has a negative and significant impact on the time transfers received by the elderly (which is consistent with the Crowding-out hypothesis).