IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-05355711.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cultural‐Policy Framework and Mothers' Earnings Penalty: A European Comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Eliane Badaoui

    (CNRS, EconomiX, Université Paris Nanterre, 92001 Nanterre)

  • Eleonora Matteazzi

    (UNIVR - Università degli studi di Verona = University of Verona)

Abstract

This article explores the diversity of cultural and policy contexts in Western European countries and examines their role in explaining the persistent and heterogeneous motherhood penalty. Using harmonized European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU‐SILC) data from 13 countries, the analysis spans 2006 to 2022 and provides average and distributional results. The findings reveal a motherhood penalty in 10 countries, with the highest levels observed in Sweden, Norway, Germany, and Austria. For these countries, quantile regressions show a decreasing motherhood penalty along the earnings distribution. The empirical analysis further sheds light on how work–family policies, culture, minimum wages, and wage‐setting institutions mediate the role of motherhood on women's earnings. The results indicate that while work–family policies promote female employment, they do not significantly mitigate the motherhood penalty. In contrast, higher minimum wages and more coordinated and centralized wage bargaining are more effective in reducing the motherhood penalty, particularly in the lower segment of the earnings distribution. More traditional gender roles and cultural values emphasizing masculinity, individualism, and power distance are associated with a lower motherhood penalty.

Suggested Citation

  • Eliane Badaoui & Eleonora Matteazzi, 2025. "Cultural‐Policy Framework and Mothers' Earnings Penalty: A European Comparison," Post-Print hal-05355711, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05355711
    DOI: 10.1111/kykl.70013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05355711. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.