The care crisis intersects with economic, social, and refugee crises, necessitating focused attention to bolster care infrastructure and address the multifaceted challenges. Women bear a disproportionate burden of unpaid domestic work, exacerbating gender inequalities in labor markets and education. This paper applies the International Labour Organization–UN Women (2021) policy tool to Turkish data, estimating coverage gaps in education and healthcare, associated costs, and employment generation potential in the care sectors and related sectors. We identify a coverage gap in education affecting 5.8 million children. The required investment to address this gap is estimated at 2.28 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). In all, 303,000 healthcare workers are needed, requiring an investment of 1.23 percent of GDP. These investments have the potential to generate 1.740 million direct and 152,000 indirect jobs. This would result in a substantial 6.7 percent increase in total employment. Considering the current gender composition, women are expected to fill 65 percent of these jobs, leading to a 14 percent improvement in female employment. Incorporating 3.7 million Syrian refugees, Turkey’s investment cost rises to 3.74 percent of GDP, creating 1.878 million new direct jobs – an 8 percent boost over the non-inclusive scenario. Prioritizing public investments in care services promises to promote gender equality, human development, and inclusive economic growth.

In the past twenty years or so, the Nordic countries (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Iceland) have seen a “renewal” in labour history. Thanks to exchanges outside the Nordic sphere and the “global turn” in labour history, new questions have been raised and topics addressed. Increased attention has been paid to the variations of labour and labour relations (including coerced labour), to working lives and the workplace, and to gender. The studies under review in this essay testify to the ongoing evolution of labour movement history in the Nordic countries in recent years.

This short article describes some of the archival materials held at Shulbrede Priory, located in West Sussex, England. This private home in Haslemere also serves as an archive containing materials related to the Ponsonby family and presents exciting research opportunities for historians of early twentieth-century Britain. The collection includes material related to the composer Hubert Parry and the diaries of Arthur and Dorothea Ponsonby. Additionally, it contains manuscript and photographic materials related to the Ponsonby's daughter, Elizabeth—particularly her involvement with the so-called Bright Young People of the 1920s and 1930s. As it remains a private home, this archive also compels us to think about the nature of family histories.

Chronic coin shortages plagued Ireland and Britain's American colonies throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Despite complaints, every proposal to mint money in early modern Britain's overseas Atlantic empire failed, whether in Ireland, the Caribbean, or North America. This article explains why. Although the rulers in the court and Parliament were sometimes enthusiastic about colonial mints, the Officers of the Royal Mint exercised enduring influence and managed to obstruct each of these projects. The evolution of the Mint officers’ advice into a maxim of monetary uniformity allowed the doctrine of “one certain standard” to survive the ensuing decades of upheaval as it shed its visible politics. While their advice grew out of the particular politics of the early Restoration, it gained special power and durability when it took on the character of technocratic expertise. Still, an investigation of the same actors’ treatment of a parallel issue—the rates of the foreign coins that circulated in colonies—reveals that an authoritarian style had an enduring hold on imperial monetary policy. This article offers an explanation for the British Empire's peculiar monetary geography, and also demonstrates the way that seemingly apolitical technical knowledge can disguise a potent politics.

In his brief ministerial career, John Stuart, third Earl of Bute, undertook a project to remake how the king's ministers would perform. Eschewing the personal power accorded to ministers like William Pitt and the Duke of Newcastle under George II, Bute and the young King George III attempted to reform the cabinet into a place of debate, unity, and resolution where administration was shared by all ministers equally. In this they were following the moral and aesthetic sensibilities of the age into a new form of political arrangements, adapting the 1688 settlement into a structure capable of administering territorial empire so long as one did not look too closely at issues of sovereignty or representation. The seemingly small and inconsistently applied shift nonetheless had enormous consequences as it shaped the hemisphere-defining policies of Bute's ministry: the Treaty of Paris of 1763 and the Royal Proclamation of 1763 that followed close on its heels. While historical accounts of Britain's 1763–83 imperial crisis tend to focus on the revenue schemes of 1764–65 as the primary origin point for conflict, Bute's “cabinet revolution” played a larger role than has generally been acknowledged in setting the stage for grander visions of imperial power and the larger protests over that power.