Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Fair or unfair? Perceived fairness of household division of labour and gender equality among Swedish women and men: the Swedish case.
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
2003 (English)In: The European Journal of Women's Studies, ISSN 1350-5068, E-ISSN 1461-7420, Vol. 10, no 2, 181-209 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The main aim of this study is to analyse how time use, individual resources, distributive justice and gender ideology influence perceptions of fairness concerning housework and gender equality. The analyses are based on survey data as well as on an interview study, both including Swedish couples. The quantitative results show that it is only factors connected to time use (division of housework and leisure time) that are significantly correlated to both perceptions of fairness concerning division of household labour and gender equality. Although the qualitative results in part confirm this picture, they also illustrate the complexity of concepts like fairness and equality. The interviews show that there are several factors and mechanisms at work in influencing perceptions of fairness and equality that were not possible to see from the quantitative analysis alone.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
London: Sage Publications, 2003. Vol. 10, no 2, 181-209 p.
Keyword [en]
distributive justice, fairness, gender equality, gender ideology, housework, men, resources, time use, women
National Category
Gender Studies
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-3758DOI: 10.1177/1350506803010002004ISI: 000182890200004OAI: diva2:142620
Available from: 2004-02-24 Created: 2004-02-24 Last updated: 2016-08-26Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Mine, yours or ours?: sharing in Swedish couples
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Mine, yours or ours?: sharing in Swedish couples
2002 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The topic of this thesis is the sharing of resources in families. Equal sharing has often been taken for granted by policy makers as well as researchers. However, a considerable body of research has now shown that unequal sharing can and does occur in families. The aim of this thesis has been to study sharing in Swedish couples and the degree to which equality can be said to exist in these. The outcomes of sharing, i e partners’ access to money and consumption have been a major focus, as has the negotiations that take place regarding sharing. The processes and mechanisms that are at play in discussions and negotiations about sharing have also been a major focus. Money and consumption are in focus, however other resources such as leisure time and housework are also addressed.

The studies are based on an in-depth interview study with ten Swedish couples where each spouse was interviewed separately; in addition, a survey study of Swedish couples is also utilized. The results of all of the four studies support earlier studies that show that unequal sharing in couples does in fact exist; women seem to experience less access to money and consumption more often than their partners. Several mechanisms were found to be at work shaping patterns of sharing. Pooling money was a common way of regarding the family economy, however it seemed this was not necessarily accompanied by an organization of money that facilitated pooling. Pooling was not necessarily a reflection of equal sharing as it is often assumed to be; instead, it could conceal inequality in that negotiations about sharing were kept off of the agenda. The gendered division of labor that still exists in Swedish society as well as in Swedish families means that women seem to have more knowledge of the needs of the family. This knowledge, which is often lacked by their spouses, also seems to mean that women take on the responsibility of seeing to it that ends are met. This could result in women sacrificing their own personal spending and using money meant for themselves as an economic buffer for the benefit of the family, something that was not found regarding men. In addition, details of the system of financial management used can sometimes act as an obstacle for women’s job of making ends meet and for their personal spending. Another important aspect of sharing in families is how money is defined. Different money can be defined differently and its definition will influence how it is shared and used. The continuous re-defining of money that takes place in families means that money’s meaning can change over time. Money was found to be relational; how it is understood and defined is influenced by its social context; how it is used can also give meaning to actions and influence the balance of power in couples. Several of the studies found support for the resource theory of marital power, however this alone could not explain women’s poorer access to money and consumption. Cultural aspects such as notions about gender and family must also be considered.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Umeå: Umeå universitet, sociologiska institutionen, 2002. 34 p.
Akademiska avhandlingar vid Sociologiska institutionen, Umeå universitet, ISSN 1104-2508 ; 24
Sociology, Money, Sharing, Economy, Family, Couples, Resources, Sweden, Gender equality, Sociologi, familjeekonomi
National Category
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-200 (URN)91-7305-169-1 (ISBN)
Public defence
2002-02-01, Hörsal E, Humanisthuset, Umeå Universitet, Umeå, 10:15 (English)
Available from: 2004-02-24 Created: 2004-02-24 Last updated: 2009-06-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Nordenmark, MikaelNyman, Charlott
By organisation
Department of Sociology
In the same journal
The European Journal of Women's Studies
Gender Studies

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 49 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link