An examination of ‘instrumental resources’ in earmarked parental leave: The case of the work–life balance directive

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Journal of European Social Policy Pub Date : 2023-10-27 DOI:10.1177/09589287231207557
Caroline de la Porte, Zhen Im, Brigitte Pircher, Nuria Ramos Martin, Dorota Szelewa
{"title":"An examination of ‘instrumental resources’ in earmarked parental leave: The case of the work–life balance directive","authors":"Caroline de la Porte, Zhen Im, Brigitte Pircher, Nuria Ramos Martin, Dorota Szelewa","doi":"10.1177/09589287231207557","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines factors that could contribute to explaining variation in take-up of leave among fathers in the light of the EU’s Work–Life Balance Directive (WLBD). The WLBD seeks to equalize care responsibilities between fathers and mothers, especially through reserved leave, with high compensation. The article begins with a cross-country overview of take-up of leave among eligible fathers, considering earmarking and the degree of compensation. Our results show variation, which cannot fully be explained by policy design (presence of high compensation with reserved leave for fathers). The article then theorizes that instrumental resources – information and accessible administrative application procedures – could be a missing link to understand the actual shift from de jure to de facto social rights. The article then carries out embedded case studies on these two aspects of instrumental resources, using original qualitative data collected during the implementation of the WLBD. The most striking finding is that countries with similar formal implementation of earmarked paid parental leave, display significant differences in commitment to instrumental resources. Put differently, the WLBD is being implemented differently, not regarding formal social rights, but on instrumental resources. This finding is important because it means that EU-initiated legislation on parental leave, could lead to differences in outcomes, that is, take-up of leave among fathers. The implication of our findings is that decision-makers and policy actors at EU level and in member states, should focus more on instrumental resources in the implementation process. This is particularly important for enhancing the de facto legitimacy of the EU in social policy, given that EU social regulation is increasing via the European Pillar of Social Rights.","PeriodicalId":47919,"journal":{"name":"Journal of European Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of European Social Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287231207557","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines factors that could contribute to explaining variation in take-up of leave among fathers in the light of the EU’s Work–Life Balance Directive (WLBD). The WLBD seeks to equalize care responsibilities between fathers and mothers, especially through reserved leave, with high compensation. The article begins with a cross-country overview of take-up of leave among eligible fathers, considering earmarking and the degree of compensation. Our results show variation, which cannot fully be explained by policy design (presence of high compensation with reserved leave for fathers). The article then theorizes that instrumental resources – information and accessible administrative application procedures – could be a missing link to understand the actual shift from de jure to de facto social rights. The article then carries out embedded case studies on these two aspects of instrumental resources, using original qualitative data collected during the implementation of the WLBD. The most striking finding is that countries with similar formal implementation of earmarked paid parental leave, display significant differences in commitment to instrumental resources. Put differently, the WLBD is being implemented differently, not regarding formal social rights, but on instrumental resources. This finding is important because it means that EU-initiated legislation on parental leave, could lead to differences in outcomes, that is, take-up of leave among fathers. The implication of our findings is that decision-makers and policy actors at EU level and in member states, should focus more on instrumental resources in the implementation process. This is particularly important for enhancing the de facto legitimacy of the EU in social policy, given that EU social regulation is increasing via the European Pillar of Social Rights.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
专款育儿假中“工具性资源”的考察:以工作与生活平衡指令为例
本文考察了可能有助于解释欧盟工作与生活平衡指令(WLBD)中父亲休假变化的因素。WLBD试图平衡父亲和母亲之间的照顾责任,特别是通过保留假,高补偿。本文首先对符合条件的父亲休假的跨国概况进行了概述,并考虑了指定用途和补偿程度。我们的研究结果显示了差异,这不能完全用政策设计来解释(为父亲保留假期的高补偿的存在)。然后,本文从理论上认为,工具性资源——信息和可获得的行政申请程序——可能是理解从法律上的社会权利向事实上的社会权利的实际转变所缺失的环节。然后,本文利用在实施WLBD期间收集的原始定性数据,对工具性资源的这两个方面进行了嵌入式案例研究。最引人注目的发现是,正式实施专用带薪育儿假的国家在对工具性资源的投入方面表现出显著差异。换句话说,《世界人权公约》的执行方式不同,不是关于正式的社会权利,而是关于工具性资源。这一发现很重要,因为它意味着欧盟发起的关于育儿假的立法,可能会导致结果的差异,也就是说,父亲们休假的情况。我们的研究结果表明,欧盟层面和成员国的决策者和政策参与者应该在实施过程中更多地关注工具性资源。这对于加强欧盟在社会政策方面的事实上的合法性尤其重要,因为欧盟的社会监管正在通过欧洲社会权利支柱得到加强。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Journal of European Social Policy publishes articles on all aspects of social policy in Europe. Papers should make a contribution to understanding and knowledge in the field, and we particularly welcome scholarly papers which integrate innovative theoretical insights and rigorous empirical analysis, as well as those which use or develop new methodological approaches. The Journal is interdisciplinary in scope and both social policy and Europe are conceptualized broadly. Articles may address multi-level policy making in the European Union and elsewhere; provide cross-national comparative studies; and include comparisons with areas outside Europe.
期刊最新文献
What works? Researching participants’ experiences of a social policy RCT through qualitative interviews Cross-class solidarity in times of crisis: the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on support for redistribution COVID-19 hits care homes: A cross-national study of mortality rates Targeted transfers, a left-wing policy? The impact of left-wing governments and corporatism on transfers to low-income families (1982–2019) Help or harm? Examining the effects of active labour market programmes on young adults’ employment quality and the role of social origin
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1