Reforming Family Leave Policy in A Corporatist, Knowledge-Oriented Regime – A Case of Non-Decision Making

In research on gender equality policy, it is pivotal to analyze under which conditions, and via what kind of process policies are or are not adopted. Analysis of failed reform efforts and opposition to specific gender equality reforms has been seen as particularly useful for understanding the circumstances of policy adoption and the involved power struggles (Bergqvist et al 2013, 2016). In this paper, we analyze a recent failed attempt to reform the Finnish family leave system with view of creating new insights about gender equality policy adoption in a corporatist, knowledge-oriented regime. Our theoretical aim is to complement existing literature on the challenges and opposition in gender equality policy adoption with a focus on the role that the growing role of knowledge in policy-making (e.g. Triantafillou 2015; Ylöstalo 2019; Ylönen et al. 2020) and the increasing authority given to economics knowledge (e.g. Hirschman and Berman 2014) plays in gender equality policy adoption. In Finland reforming the family leave system has been notoriously challenging, due to ideological differences between political parties as well as the power and vested interests of central labour market organizations, who in the Finnish corporatist regimen play a central role in policy-making (Salmi and Lammi-Taskula 2015). The reform under study was initiated by a right-conservative government (2015-2019) in 2017 after significant societal pressure to improve gender equality. However, the negotiations about the reform were characterized by the dominance of economic concerns: the idea that the reform should not cause additional costs and that the reform should increase the employment rate. After a few months of negotiations between the government and labour market organizations, the reform was withdrawn. Our main research questions are: 1) why were gender equality goals suppressed in the reform? Why did the reform fail despite the diluted content? The paper is based on extensive document data (N=101) and interviews of the participants of the policy process (N=14). With this data, using qualitative methods, we can offer an in-depth analysis on the manifold reasons behind the dilution and the eventual failure of the policy initiative. The paper sheds light on the role of changing corporatist power relations and the increased reliance on economist, quantitative knowledge in the challenges of gender equality policy formulation and adoption. It argues that the interests and ideologies of the key actors pushed gender equality concerns aside and lead to a narrow understanding of gender equality as labour market equality. The priority given to quantitative, economist knowledge in the policy process contributed to the sidelining and narrowing of gender equality perspectives and favoured the interests of some of the actors.