Are universal measures sufficient in reducing child poverty in the Nordic countries? An analysis of policies and political commitments.

BACKGROUND: The five Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden) have long traditions of social welfare policies that have eradicated poverty as part of their goals. The purpose of this study was to increase our understanding of why child poverty is still significant in the Nordic countries despite existing strategies. METHODS: A qualitative analysis of Nordic government documents and reports between 2007 and 2019 was carried out to track changes in public health priorities and political measures and to determine the similarities and differences between the five countries. RESULTS: In all countries, most of the measures were universal, such as benefits during pregnancy, paid parental leave before and after the child was born, paid parental leave related to children's sickness, child allowances, day care, free health care for children and support for disabled children. National policies aimed to reduce social inequalities and child poverty exist in all five countries, but unaffordable housing, unequal disposable family income distribution and unequal income distribution at local municipality levels seem to be obstacles to reaching national policy goals. CONCLUSIONS: Despite comprehensive universal measures to eradicate child poverty, inequalities are significant and increasing in some of the Nordic countries. This might be due to a lack of proportional universalism, where universal measures are in place in all Nordic countries, but with a lack of scale and intensity proportional to the children and families at risk. The significance of eliminating social inequalities needs to be emphasised at the local level.

Empowerment evaluation of a Swedish gender equity plan.

BACKGROUND: Empowerment is essential for gender equity and health. The city of Malmö, Sweden, has formulated a development plan for gender equity integration (GEIDP). A 'Policy Empowerment Index' (PEI) was previously developed to assess the empowerment potential of policies. OBJECTIVES: To pilot-evaluate the GEIDP's potential for empowerment and to test the PEI for future policy evaluations. DESIGN: The GEIDP was analyzed and scored according to electronically retrieved evidence on constituent opinion, participation, capacity development, evaluation-adaptation, and impact. RESULTS: The plan's PEI score was 64% (CI: 48-78) and was classified as 'enabling', ranging between 'enabling' and 'supportive'. The plan's strengths were: 1) constituent knowledge and concern; 2) peripheral implementation; 3) protection of vulnerable groups; and 4) evaluation/adaptation procedures. It scored average on: 1) policy agenda setting; 2) planning; 3) provisions for education; 4) network formation; 5) resource mobilization. The weakest point was regarding promotion of employment and entrepreneurship. CONCLUSIONS: The PEI evaluation highlighted the plan's potential of constituency empowerment and proposed how it could be augmented.