Implementing Sex Equality Politics In Transforming Finnish Academia
Author(s):
Johanna Lätti (presenting / submitting)
Conference:
ECER 2017
Format:
Paper

Session Information

ERG SES H 03, Gender and Education

Paper Session

Time:
2017-08-22
11:00-12:30
Room:
W2.06
Chair:
Isabelle Mili

Contribution

In the Nordic countries, mainstream educational and employment policies have embraced the aims of sex equality for some decades. These goals, however, fluctuate under the pressure of other educational and economic demands. In Finland, educational policies are even claimed to increasingly follow the incentives of efficiency and profitability at the expense of equality. Yet, the institutional requirements to promote equality have even tightened as a result of amendments to legislation and transnational recommendations.

In this presentation, I aim to clarify this contradiction by analysing the implementation of sex equality politics in transforming Finnish universities. I ask, how equality requirements are interpreted and translated into practice by actors involved. What kind of institutional position is reserved for equality issues and actors in relation to the latest organisational and administrational changes in academic regime?

 

This approach is supported by two indications of the change in the view of sex equality. Firstly, the Universities Act of 2009, and the consequent organizational reforms, transformed the juridical position of universities with each becoming either a public corporation or foundation. With the change of the management system and the position of personnel from the holders of offices to employees, the university reform appears as a confirmation of the marketization and management by results, a globally recognised process commenced in Finnish academia since the 1990s. Productization and the economic pressure on universities have altered the management of human resources (Ylijoki, 2010), which the equality work is closely attached to and dependent on.

 

Secondly, national and organizational equality politics are increasingly transnational. Gender mainstreaming, as the latest equality strategy promoted by transnational organizations, targets mainstream a ‘gender perspective’ into all levels and fields of education and work. Since the 1990s, it has been on the agendas of ILO, UNESCO and the European Union and defined as ‘The (re)organisation, improvement, development and evaluation of policy processes, so that a gender equality perspective is incorporated in all policies at all levels and at all stages, by the actors normally involved in policy-making’ (Council of Europe, 1998). In Finland, the Equality Act obliges universities to promote sex equality, which materialises as administrative equality planning. Echoing mainstreaming definitions quite literally, equality plans suggest taking ‘equality questions into account as a penetrating and central principle’ at all levels, fields and actions, while ‘The practices and structures of the administration ought to be developed in a way that the target of sex equality is included in all decision making’.

 

The actual implementation of transnationally developed equality politics, however, rather fluctuate at local and organisational levels. From the perspective of domestication, the implementation of transnational models influences local conceptions and policy actions, but at the same time, they are always dependent on and adjusted to the old institutional practices and conditions (Alasuutari 2012). In this case, they are also incorporated into visions of the reformed university. I am particularly interested in the ways equality issues are negotiated at the level of micropolitics, where the interpretations are depended on different interests, actor positions and institutional practices in which the aims and means are adjusted.

The mutual influence between the understanding of sex, (in)equality and different implementation practices of gender mainstreaming is also traced. In literature, the implementation strategies are commonly divided into integrationist and agenda-setting or transformative approaches. Supplemented with the understanding of sex/gender, Squires (2005) has characterized gender mainstreaming strategies into three types: inclusion, reversal and displacement. Based on the data from Finnish academia, I analyse the receiving of mainstreaming principle in universities’ equality actions. I utilize the above divisions and relate them on the central directions of academia embodied in the university reform.

Method

I approach academia as an institutional context of education and work, where different policy agendas interact and where equality politics, as a sector of socio-policies, are meant for governing the equality promotion. By key actor interviews and documents of selected Finnish universities, I analyse the implementation practices of equality politics. The documentary data consists of equality plans as the main guidelines for equality promotion, provided by legislation every 2-3 year and produced by equality boards. 17 interviews were collected in 2016 from four universities, which selection could be described as appropriate sampling based on the research questions and theoretical pre-understanding. Variously effected by the university reform, two of the selected universities went through massive structural reform and merger, while in other two the results were less comprehensive. Institutionalized equality politics in universities’ organisation is attached to personnel management and different established boards. All interviewees, chosen on the grounds of the position, are actors involved in equality work at different levels: representatives of personnel management, the chair/members of equality committee, chief shop steward and the representatives of the personnel at faculties/departments. Face to face theme interviews covered questions on 1) Position, role and experiences in equality work; 2) Organisation and actors at different levels; 3) The implementation and effectiveness of equality promotion. The data was analysed by the means of both quantitative and qualitative content analysis, utilizing computational text analysis tools of topic modelling for mapping the data and thematic content analysis for closer reading. I focused on the characteristics of language with attention to the content and contextual meaning of the expressions. First, different themes were identified by the dominant vocabulary and concepts. Second, themes were explored for different negotiation and implementation strategies used. Third, distinctive actor positioning were identified and compared, in order to reach shared and distinctive emphasis at different levels. The interpretation of the data rests upon theoretical understanding, domestication of gender mainstreaming principle and its micropolitical negotiation into the organisational reforms. The data is approached from the ‘double role’ (Alastalo & Åkerman 2010; Ball 1993 in Saarinen 2008), describing the phenomenon – certain implementation processes, practices and experiences - but at the same time creating and maintaining interpretations and understandings of equality. Both the documents and interviews act as a witness, whose description is put into the context, for also to discover what is considered important in universities.

Expected Outcomes

In Finnish universities, sex equality issues are an institutionally accepted element, as integrated into managerial practices, quality assurance and internationalization. Different orientations were identified towards equality actions and understanding (in)equalities in the university context. Integrative methods operate through administrations’ own procedures such as auditing, training, statistics and manuals. Equality work is closely tied to the management of human resources and seen especially as an attribute of fair leadership, which is compatible with the increased centralized power of rectors and university boards and emerging image of professional managers. Through strict obedience to legislation, gender mainstreaming materializes as the tightening of indicator policies and detailed requirements for compiling sex-based statistics. These moderate actions are widely accepted, while universities may appear progressive in equality promotion. Equality requirements appear thus as juridical or bureaucratic problem to solve, fulfilling legal formalities for to avoid the consequences of willful neglects. Although gender mainstreaming embraces the shift from women to gender, the strategy of reversal appears as a specific female perspective in universities’ equality agenda. Sex/gender inequalities are particularly based on women’s experiences and problems, while more women are aimed at academic top positions and male-dominated fields. Interviewees, however, wished to detach themselves from the special women’s cause to avoid negative connotations. Displacement is present in increased discourse on diversity and non-discrimination, where gender mainstreaming principle turns into recommendations of fair treatment whose problems are solved case specifically. This orientation emphasizes physical accessibility and special arrangements for personal circumstances and exceptions. The focus is on sex neutral, individual non-discrimination, which is compatible with emerging entrepreneurial practices of customership and subjective rights. The doctrine of internationalization is present, while equality and inclusion of foreign workers are seen as competitive and attractive factors. This view of equality as individual non-discrimination differs from the “Nordic model” of collective equality.

References

Alastalo, M. & Åkerman, M. (2010) Faktojen jäljillä: asiantuntijahaastattelun analyysi. (Tracing the Facts: The analysis of Expert Interviews) In Ruusuvuori, J., Nikander, P. ja Hyvärinen, M. (Eds). Haastattelun analyysi. Vastapaino. Tampere. Alasuutari, P., & Alasuutari, M. (2012). The domestication of early childhood education plans in Finland. Global Social Policy 12(2), 2012, 109–128. Beveridge, F. & Nott, S. 2002. Mainstreaming: A Case for Optimism and Cynicism. Feminist Legal Studies 10: 299–311. Heikkinen, A., Lammela, J., Liétzen, L., Lätti, J. & Virtanen, E. (2012). Gender mainstreaming: Inclusion or exclusion. In Stolz, S., and Gonon, P. (eds.) Challenges and reforms in vocational education. Aspects of inclusion and exclusion. Bern: Peter Lang AG. 97–118. Lätti, J. (in press) Individualized sex equality in transforming Finnish academia. European Educational Research Journal 15(6) (Special Issue: Gender and Work/Life Interferences in Scientific Careers). 1–19. Lombardo, E. 2005. Integrating or Setting the Agenda? Gender Mainstreaming in the European Constitution-making Process. Social Politics 12 (3): 412–432. Morley, L. (2007). Sister-matic: Gender mainstreaming in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education 12(5–6), 607–620. Morley, L., (1999) Organising Feminisms. the Micropolitics of the Academy. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press Narotzky, S. (2007). The project in the model. Reciprocity, social capital and the politics of ethnographic realism. Current Anthropology 48(3), 403–424. Nevala A and Rinne R (2012) Korkeakoulutuksen muodonmuutos. [The transformation of higher education] In Kettunen P and Simola H (eds.) Tiedon ja osaamisen Suomi. Kasvatus ja koulutus Suomessa 1960-luvulta 2000-luvulle. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. 203–228. Squires, J. (2007). The new politics of gender equality. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. UNESCO (2013). Priority Gender Equality Action Plan 2014–2021. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Van Eerdewijk,A. (2014) The micropolitics of evaporation: Gender mainstreaming instruments in practice. Journal of International Development 26(3). Verloo, M. (2005). Displacement and Empowerment: Reflections on the Council of Europe approach to gender mainstreaming and gender equality. Social Politics 12 (3), 344–366. Saarinen, T. (2008) Position of text and discourse analysis in higher education policy research. Studies in Higher Education 33(6), 719–728. Ylijoki O. (2010). Future orientations in episodic labour: Short-term academics as a case in point. Time & Society 19(3), 365–386.

Author Information

Johanna Lätti (presenting / submitting)
University of Tampere
Faculty of Education
Tampere

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.