His methodology came from statistics and economics, but his commitment went beyond research: he was a member of the board for Dansk Kvindesamfund (the Danish Women’s Society) and the editor of the society’s journal, 'Kvinden og Samfundet' ('Woman and Society'), and he was an advocate of legislative changes to improve women’s rights, long before Danish women got the vote in national elections in 1915. He also ran for Parliament several times and served as a Member of Parliament from 1903 to 1909.

His dedication to the women’s cause came at a cost. In 1893, he was passed over for a position as office head in Parliament, something that was widely viewed as a result of his support for women’s suffrage. He seized the opportunity to spend more time on his study of the living conditions of seamstresses.

He saw this work as his calling and hoped that it would eventually earn him and his staff at Dansk Kvindesamfund international recognition. Sveistrup’s work formed an important link between the academic study of social conditions and the political struggle for equal opportunities.

International recognition remained elusive, in part because he published in Danish, but his research was highly consequential as an early empirical analysis of how wages are determined. His endeavour began during the early 1890s, when he proposed that Dansk Kvindesamfund undertake a study of the working and living conditions of working-class women in Copenhagen.

The society, which had been founded in 1871 to promote Danish women’s position in society, was dominated by women – and men – from the middle classes, but it also took an interest in the growing groups of working-class women, who had begun to organise themselves politically.

Sveistrup’s study was based on extensive information collected directly from the women. He included women from a wide range of professions, from industry and crafts to homeworking. The biggest group was the seamstresses, who often worked at home on commission from tailors, cobblers, glove makers, hosiers and other textile manufacturers. Through the replies of these women, Sveistrup’s project provided unprecedented insight into the daily life of working-class women in Copenhagen.

To keep costs down, the study was limited to seamstresses. About 830 women were interviewed at home by Sveistrup’s female research assistants, who relied on a formal questionnaire.

The material included information about the women’s age, marital status, working hours, education, work experience, health, debt, expenses and leisure time – and, not least, how content the women were with their lives. All the information was carefully committed to paper and subsequent subjected to statistical analysis.

The emerging picture was bleak. The women often had poor working conditions, worked long hours and had few breaks. This had a negative influence on their health, exacerbating the health impact of poor housing conditions and nutrition. The pay was low, not just compared to men’s wages but also compared to other female occupations. Sveistrup concluded that many seamstresses were unhappy with their lives and that few had any realistic hope of working their way out of poverty and poor health.

Sveistrup based his work on what we now call data, which he collected and processed using new methodologies. He published his findings in a book and in the 'Danish Journal of Economics' but also used them actively in the public debate.

As a politician and campaigner for women’s rights, he advocated for the seamstresses, demanded legislative changes and suggested initiatives that would lead to improved working conditions, higher pay and better living conditions for the women. His work made a significant contribution to contemporary discussions about labour-market policies, women’s rights and social conditions, and his research had a real and enduring impact.

The chapter is written by Dorthe Chakravarty.