Social Policy Change: Work–family Tensions in Sweden, Australia and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The rise of the adult worker family norm across countries of the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development has created challenges for reconciling work and family life as the unpaid work of the female caregiver can no longer be assumed. The article compares childcare arrangements and maternity/parental leave programmes in Sweden, Australia and Canada that attempt to address these challenges. Sweden was an early innovator, establishing the ‘gold standard’ for such arrangements in the form of publicly funded, universally accessible, centre‐based childcare and generously paid parental leave, including a ‘daddy quota’. Yet policy development remains open to contestation and change even here. Australia and Canada have shown a preference for market‐based solutions although each has taken steps towards Swedish style solutions. In particular, Canadian federalism has left space for such experiments at the provincial scale. The broader institutional arrangements embedded in each country have helped to shape the responses. Yet political contestation, enlivened by the transnational flow of ideas (and ideals), has played an important role in shaping the direction and velocity of change. In the first section we develop this argument, beginning with reflections on how to identify the significance of changes, then moving on to explore the role of institutions, actors and ideas in accounting for these developments. Subsequent sections examine developments first in Sweden then Australia and Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".