Models of social welfare and gender equality: United States of America, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Sweden

Although three distinctive models of social welfare have been identified in the comparative policy literature, no systematic attempt has been made to assess their implications for gender equality. This dissertation attempts this task. First, it considers the theoretical implications of residual, structural and institutional models of social welfare for gender equality. Second, it asks which of these major 20th century policy models has demonstrated the most potential to promote gender-sensitive policy and gender equality.;Chapters One and Two argue that heuristic models and developmental frameworks need to be seen as analytical tools which are helpful for generating hypotheses and criteria for comparative research. Noting the methodological guidelines and systematic biases of heuristic research, Chapter Two reviews theoretical developments in mainstream and feminist comparative social policy and in light of these developments, proposes a 'gendered' framework based on prevailing assumptions about the role of the state and gender roles. The framework suggests that the residual premise of a minimalist state and dependenthousewife family has little potential to promote gender-sensitive policy and gender equality. The structural ideology of an interventionist state and earner as well as carer roles for women offers considerably more potential for gender-sensitive policy development. However the institutional premise of an interventionist state and earner and carer roles for both sexes appears to offer the most potential for gender-sensitive policy and gender equality.;Part Two of the dissertation examines this proposition in light of policy development in four areas which are crucial for gender equality: contraception and abortion, child care and child support, care leave, and income support and homecare. Taking the United States, the former Soviet Union and Sweden as elaborations of residual, structural and institutional policy approaches, Chapters Three to Six examine policy development in these four areas. Each chapter is organized under the following headings: Ideology, Policy development, Policy outcome and a short Summary of findings. Chapter Seven concludes with a discussion of the relevance of the findings in light of the disappearance of the Soviet model and the difficulties of the Swedish model in the wake of globalization and rising neo-liberalism.