Introduction
With its policies frequently seen as extraordinary, the European Union (EU) is one of the most developed political systems in the world when it comes to the promotion of gender equality. Since roughly 40 years ago, the EU has imposed on its members a set of standards and principles that are higher than those that are in place in the majority of nations, and it has provided a particularly favourable atmosphere for female activism (Albertoni & Wise, 2021). However, the severe and protracted economic and budgetary crisis of the late 2000s has cast doubt on the EU’s ability to provide a favorable setting for implementing a bold public program to address gender equality.
Discussion
Compared to other European social regulatory initiatives, the EU’s policy on gender equality was seen by all observers at the turn of the twenty-first century as unique. For several years, gender equality seemed to be the sole area of social action where regulation was not only a minor compromise between agreement on the highest standards and a complete lack of rules (Patel, 2021). The promotion of gender equality and the battle against sex-based discrimination were considered two of the few instances in which the EU went beyond just fluidifying the market by imposing on its member states a set of standards and values higher than those found in the majority of nations.
In the framework of an economic Community built on the implementation of a Single Market. Therefore, developing a European-level effort for gender equality in 1957 was not self-evident (Patel, 2021). Thus, in full compliance with enlargements, the political situation within the Council and the Commission, and the driving role played by women like Jacqueline Nonon, Éliane Vogel-Polsky between the years 1926 and 2015 (Patel, 2021), Barbara Helfferich, or Eryl McNally, European gender equality policies were developed through consecutive treaties and the gradual extension of Community competence.
The Treaty of Rome’s negotiators thought economic growth would inevitably lead to social improvement as Europe developed. Additionally, member states’ goal was to maintain their social acumen. Initially, economic justifications had to be provided for the European Economic Community’s (EEC) activities in the social realm. To prevent unfair competition between the founding member states while gradually removing trade and customs obstacles (Danescu, 2020), the main topic of discussion during the discussions was the necessity to unify national social systems. This helps explain the purpose of article 119, which calls for equal pay for male and female workers (Jayachandran, 2021). Rather than promoting gender equality or expressing a desire for social justice, this article was written to prevent social dumping in industries that at the time relied heavily on female labor, like the textile industry.
Therefore, until 1997, the only legal basis for European action in the field of gender equality was Article 119 (Article 157 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU) (Belavusau, 2020). Nevertheless, a comprehensive strategy for addressing inequality and advancing gender equality was developed based on this one idea. As a result, the EU is frequently regarded as one of the most progressive political systems in the world.
Several various devices served as the foundation for this policy. First, a legislative framework treaty, guidelines, and case law specifically guaranteed equal pay and treatment in the workplace and on the job market. In addition, it outlawed all forms of discrimination in social security programs, established minimum standards for parental and maternity leaves, safeguarded the safety of expectant employees and new moms (Bagari & Sagmeister, 2022), and specified the legal standing of self-employed people and their spouses. It equally forbade both direct and indirect. It equally prohibited both direct and indirect discrimination, defined harassment (including sexual and gender-based harassment) as a form of discrimination, allowed for the shifting of the burden of proof, acknowledged the possibility of affirmative action “for the underrepresented sex,” and guaranteed equality for men and women in the acquisition and provision of goods and services.
Additionally, from a legislative perspective, the central and most developed pillar of Social Europe was undoubtedly achieving gender equality. However, it defined harassment, including sexual and gender-based harassment, as a form of discrimination that allowed for shifting the burden of proof. It acknowledged the possibility of affirmative action for the underrepresented sex and guaranteed equality for men and women in acquiring and providing goods and services (Engle, 2022). From a central legal perspective, the primary and most developed pillar of Social Europe was undoubtedly achieving gender equality.
The implementation of financing programs for questions of violence (the DAPHNE program) or the inclusion of women in development assistance programs was also supported by this policy for gender equality. These financial instruments allowed it to expand the field of action for gender equality beyond its traditional sphere of intervention, which is the labour market. The final foundation for it was “soft law,” or non-binding law, such as gender mainstreaming, the European Council’s European Pact for Gender Equality (Jansen, 2020), the European Commission’s Women’s Charter, and the Strategy for Gender Equality for 2010-2015, which aims to incorporate gender into all European policies. A Vilnius-based European Institute for Gender Equality was also established in 2007 and launched its operations in 2010.
The Lisbon Strategy’s European Social Agenda, which defined the key social concerns for the coming decade, placed Social Europe—and precisely issues related to gender equality—relatively high on the European policy objectives in 2000. However, in 2010, social Europe appeared to have a far more minor role in the Europe 2020 plan, the integrated guidelines (IGs) (Eden & Wagstaff, 2021), the standard employment targets and goals agreed by the Council and the EU, and the European Semester for the coordination of economic policy. Since the middle of the 2000s, the Council’s political balance and enlargements have changed to the detriment of any minimal consensus on the necessity of the European project holding both justice and social progress on the one hand and growth and economic competitiveness on the other (Eden & Wagstaff, 2021). Additionally, even though it was historically developed in the context of social Europe, gender equality was added to the justice portfolio in 2011 and is now seen as a component of a comprehensive fundamental rights policy.
Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that at the start of the twenty-first century, after many decades of progress, the European policy of gender equality is in danger of being dismantled or possibly slowly vanishing. The change has yet to be notified and has been occurring without a formal decision. Nevertheless, it has an impact on all areas of policy, including the reduction of funding, grants, and legislative initiatives, the weakening of various institutional structures responsible for promoting gender equality within the Commission (O’Connor & Irvine, 2020), the Council, and the Parliament, and the instability of the public policy community that has come together to address this issue. The institutional, interpersonal, financial, and normative autonomy of EU gender equality policy has been severely restricted in a climate of fiscal austerity.
However, as this strategy is gradually abandoned, the significance of gender equality as a component of the European Union’s fundamental identity is even more firmly affirmed. There is an increased risk of the symbolic affirmation being dependent only on an extended policy, lacking any natural substance or impact. Nonetheless, to enhance work-life balance and prevent violence against women, the EU institutions have been working on suggestions for new EU rules during the last parliamentary session as part of a larger gender equality initiative (Isailovic, 2021). One of the biggest problems will continue to be promoting equality between men and women in the upcoming years. Different effects on men and women will need to be considered regarding matters like demographic trends, technological advancements, and changes in how we work, to name a few.
Furthermore, actions to advance gender equality have been taken by the European Union (EU) for a very long time. Since 1957, when equal pay for equal labor was in labor in Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome, equality between women and men has been a more significant aspect of EU policy (Isailovic, 2021). Over the years, the original emphasis on pay equity and employment equality has expanded to include other economic and social policy spheres. The focus has also changed from simply providing legal protection against sex-based discrimination (equal treatment) to taking more proactive steps to eliminate the historical disadvantages women have faced and achieve equality in practice. This shift has been accompanied by the adoption of gender mainstreaming to help achieve these goals.
Additionally, monitoring by the EU reveals that further work is still required to meet the aim of gender equality. The index created by the EU’s Gender Equality Institute tracks gender inequalities over time (EIGE). It demonstrates that improvements have been achieved during the previous ten years but have been gradual and that considerable regional variations still exist. While most countries do very well in health and education (Isailovic, 2021)., the same cannot be said for employment, access to financial and economic resources, or leadership—where most advancements have been achieved but where the gender gap is still the greatest. Progress has slowed or even reversed in several EU Member States, particularly regarding the amount of time spent on unpaid care and household chores, where the disparity has widened. One in three women in Europe has suffered physical and sexual assault since the age of, which continues to impact how equitably women may participate in society (Isailovic, 2021).. The analysis is also starting to show how intersections between gender and variables like age, race, sexual orientation, and disability worsen prejudice and reduce people’s prospects in life.
Additionally, it will be necessary to carefully evaluate the gender aspects of emerging trends to build fair and effective policies. In some nations, changes to public services and other austerity measures have hampered efforts to advance women’s employment rates and a more equitable distribution of childcare duties among men (Razavi et al., 2020), women, and society. This might have a long-lasting effect, as the aging population might increase pressure on women to “fill gaps” in public services.
The groups most likely to participate in the growing non-standard forms of work, which increase participation in the labor market but are unstable and associated with lower compensation, training, and maternity benefits, include women, young people, and migrants. According to data from the EU, 45% of women with low educational levels have insecure employment, compared to 26% of males with the same level of education, increasing their risk of poverty and social isolation (Manhica et al., 2019). Boys are now performing poorly in terms of educational results, on the other hand. Therefore, a significant problem will be ensuring that both sexes benefit equally from higher-paying, higher-quality positions in developing industries. Girls and women are less likely than males to have advanced IT skills, pursue a career in ICT, rise to expert and management levels, or establish their tech firms in Europe (Manhica et al., 2019). The analysis also reveals that although the digital revolution offers new chances for gender equality in sectors like work and political involvement, it also brings a rise in sexism and new types of cyber-violence that may be obstacles to women’s participation.
There is much proof to support the advantages of gender equality and its potential to enhance individual well-being and outcomes for society and the economy. In 2018, the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) assessed the costs of gender inequality and discovered that the persistent gender pay gap is causing women to suffer quantifiable harm in terms of lost earnings, increasing their risk of poverty, economic dependence, and intimate partner violence. Additionally, it predicted that by 2030, the gender pay gap would cost the EU’s GDP in the region €240 billion (Beckman et al., 2020). On the other hand, research by EIGE indicates that eliminating gender disparities in areas like education, employment, and wages would increase employment opportunities for both sexes, help address enduring problems like occupational segregation and low productivity, and have a largely positive impact on GDP per capita. Policies promoting gender equality have a more significant effect on GDP than some policies about education. Research has revealed that gender equality in one domain has a cascading impact on other parts, notwithstanding experts’ recommendations that addressing all gender inequities collectively is preferable to address them individually.
While not yet accessible for all policy areas, EIGE and other EU agencies are assisting in collecting the gender-disaggregated information and indicators required to create efficient EU and national policies and monitor their gender impact (Beckman et al., 2020). The budget reductions brought on by the economic crisis have been cited as a significant source of worry by the national organizations monitoring gender equality.
However, the biggest obstacle may be the present reaction against gender equality occurring internationally and inside the EU, which threatens to undermine current progress, weaken anti-discrimination safeguards, and obstruct future advancement. The critical areas of institutional and policy framework, particular policy areas, such as education, sexual and reproductive health and rights, and violence against women, as well as the working environment of women’s rights NGOs, are those where it is manifesting. These areas are universal across nations. National equality organizations also claim rising political pressure in specific EU member states (Parvin, 2022). The EU must uphold its commitment to gender equality and women’s rights among its core values because, as their EU body Equinet has warned, levels of inequality, intolerance, and discrimination are rising amid a populist discourse frequently hostile to fundamental values.
Many Europeans believe that advancing gender equality is crucial for a just and democratic society (91%), for the economy (87%) and for them personally (84%), according to polls (Eurobarometer 465 from 2017). The percentage of EU people who want the EU to interfere more in this policy area has increased from 55% to 65% (Dennison, 2019), according to a comparison of Eurobarometer surveys performed for the European Parliament in 2016 and 2018. There are several notable variations between Member States. The countries with the highest levels of support for more decisive EU action are Spain (86%), Portugal (85%), and Cyprus (82%) (Dennison, 2019). Latvian and Estonian citizens show minor support for more EU action, 37 and 32 percent, respectively (Dennison, 2019). Therefore, based on the statistics, the issue with gender equality was a concern in Europe.
The total rise in support for more EU participation in gender equality is ten percentage points. Among all the places studied, it has increased by the second-highest amount. Greece (up 21 percentage points) and Finland have experienced the most significant shift increase of 20 percentage points (Dennison, 2019). Only Estonia and Italy, where expectations for more engagement have decreased by nine and two percentage points, are an exception to the overall trend. Therefore, only half or less of the populace believes that gender equality has been reached in politics, the workplace, and in positions of leadership in businesses and other organizations. 70% of people would favor passing laws to guarantee political parity between men and women (Krook & Sanín, 2020). 74% of Europeans believe domestic abuse against women is widespread in their nation (Krook & Sanín, 2020). Most people think there is an unacceptable gender wage disparity in their nation.
In addition, 46% of Europeans believe that EU efforts on equal treatment for men and women, in particular, are appropriate. The survey’s opinion of EU action as adequate has fallen in only one other policy area, but only by two percentage points. This isn’t a widespread pattern in the EU, however. While the Czech Republic and the UK have seen the most significant dips in the percentage of individuals who think EU action is acceptable (downs from 66% to 59% and 55% to 47%) (Brown, 2022), nine Member States are seeing the reverse trend. The two countries with the most significant gains are Sweden and Hungary where the shares increased from 22% to 31% and 47% to 59%, respectively (Brown, 2022). Even though the overall trend in how EU citizens view current action is slightly negative, more EU citizens still believe that the EU is doing enough to ensure that men and women are treated equally than they do not in the EU.
Conclusion
In conclusion, since the first directives in this area were introduced in the 1970s, the EU has developed comprehensive legislation on gender equality, mainly in the place of employment. This legislation covers equal pay, social security, employment, working conditions, and harassment (Directive 2006/54/EC); self-employment (Directive 2010/41/EU); and guaranteed rights to maternity and parental leave (Directives 92/85/EEC and 2010/18/EU). In addition, the EU framework contains directives 2011/36/EU and 2012/29/EU that protect victims of crime and trafficking and provide equitable access to products and services. This enforceable EU regulation permits affirmative action while outlawing direct and indirect discrimination, victimization, and harassment. It is believed to have given the Member States’ laws against gender discrimination a vital boost and provided people with legally enforceable rights.
References
Albertoni, N., & Wise, C. (2021). International trade norms in the age of Covid-19 nationalism on the rise?. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 14(1), 41-66.
Bagari, S., & Sagmeister, M. (2022). Economic dependence and parental protection: A comparative analysis of Austrian and Slovenian labour and social security rights of economically dependent self-employed parents. European Labour Law Journal, 13(1), 86-107.
Beckman, J., Ivanic, M., Jelliffe, J. L., Baquedano, F. G., & Scott, S. G. (2020). Economic and Food Security Impacts of Agricultural Input Reduction Under the European Union Green Deal’s Farm to Fork and Biodiversity Strategies (No. 1473-2020-1039).
Belavusau, U. (2020). Legislative and judicial politics of LGBT rights in the European Union. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.
Brown, S. A. (2022). Fraying at the Edges: A Subsystems/Normative Power Analysis of the EU’s “One China Policy/Policies”. The China Quarterly, 1-24.
Danescu, E. (2020). Taxing intangible assets: issues and challenges for a digital Europe. Internet Histories, 4(2), 196-216.
Dennison, J. (2019). Impact of public attitudes to migration on the political environment in the Euro-Mediterranean region: First chapter: Europe. European University Institute.
Eden, L., & Wagstaff, M. F. (2021). Evidence-based policymaking and the wicked problem of SDG 5 Gender Equality. Journal of International Business Policy, 4(1), 28-57.
Engle, J. C. (2022). Sexual violence, intangible harm, and the promise of transformative remedies. Washington and Lee Law Review, 79(1045).
Isailovic, I. (2021). Gender equality as investment: EU work-life balance measures and the neo-liberal shift. Yale J. Int’l L., 46, 277.
Jansen, J. A. (2020). European Union’s contribution to resolving gender inequalities on the German labour market: a case study in NRW (Bachelor’s thesis, University of Twente).
Jayachandran, S. (2021). Social norms as a barrier to women’s employment in developing countries. IMF Economic Review, 69(3), 576-595.
Krook, M. L., & Sanín, J. R. (2020). The cost of doing politics? Analyzing violence and harassment against female politicians. Perspectives on Politics, 18(3), 740-755.
Manhica, H., Berg, L., Almquist, Y. B., Rostila, M., & Hjern, A. (2019). Labour market participation among young refugees in Sweden and the potential of education: a national cohort study. Journal of Youth Studies, 22(4), 533-550.
O’Connor, P., & Irvine, G. (2020). Multi-level state interventions and gender equality in higher education institutions: The Irish Case. Administrative Sciences, 10(4), 98.
Parvin, P. (2022). Hidden in plain sight: how lobby organisations undermine democracy. In Wealth and Power (pp. 229-251). Routledge.
Patel, S. (2021). Gaps in the protection of athletes gender rights in sport—a regulatory riddle. The International Sports Law Journal, 21(4), 257-275.
Razavi, S., Behrendt, C., Bierbaum, M., Orton, I., & Tessier, L. (2020). Reinvigorating the social contract and strengthening social cohesion: Social protection responses to COVID‐19. International Social Security Review, 73(3), 55-80.
