Federica Meluzzi – PhD student in economics at CREST-GENES, IP Paris, and research officer at the Ministry of Labour (DARES)

Her research focuses on labor economics, gender, and economics. Her thesis, “The College Melting Pot: Peers, Culture and Women’s Job Search”, was supervised by the economists Arne Uhlendorff and Pierre Cahuc (Sciences Po).

In September 2025, she will begin a post-doctorate at the Department of Economics of Bocconi University in Milan, then, in June 2026, she will join Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU) of Munich as an assistant professor in economics.

1. What have been the key stages of your research journey?

I see my path as an experience of strong personal and professional growth. Several moments were particularly significant. I am thinking in particular of the two visiting periods I had the chance to do, first at the London School of Economics (LSE), then at the University of California, Berkeley (UC Berkeley). These experiences, extremely enriching in every respect, truly reinforced my desire to pursue an academic career after the PhD.

2. What scientific objectives did you set for yourself in the framework of your thesis?

My objectives were simple: to identify important research questions and try to answer them ambitiously, using the best tools and data available.

3. Did the PhD confirm or change your initial professional project?

When I started the PhD, I was quite open regarding my prospects. I had previously worked in international organizations and, at first, I thought I might return there, as I had greatly enjoyed that experience. Over time, the PhD was for me a process of progressive awareness: I discovered that research was a true passion, which gave me the desire to pursue an academic career.

4. What advice would you give to a PhD student at the beginning of the journey?

Think big and enjoy! I don’t know if I am really in a position to give advice, but these are the two principles that guided me throughout my thesis. What also helped me a lot to live this period serenely, especially in the more stressful moments, was to remind myself of the chance I have to be able to do a job that I love, and to keep in mind that difficulties are part of any profession — nothing very specific to the PhD.

5. What guided your interest in this thesis topic and how would you present it in a few words?

I chose to orient my thesis toward the study of inequalities, a subject that is particularly close to my heart as a citizen. Making this question the object of my daily work seemed to me a concrete and satisfying way of contributing to society.

In my thesis, I focus on inequalities between men and women in the labor market, which persist despite decades of progress, notably because of gender norms that remain very entrenched. My research looks at how these norms evolve: for example, how the design of parental leave influences household decisions regarding the sharing of childcare, or how peers met at university influence women’s professional choices.

6. In what way does your thesis go beyond previous research on the persistence of gender norms and, more specifically, on the understanding of the drivers that generate it?

Most existing studies focus either on highlighting the persistence of gender norms across generations, or on the role of the family — especially mothers — in transmitting these norms to women. In my article, I broaden the perspective by studying the influence of the broader social environment, and notably that of peers at university, on the transmission of norms relating to female participation in the labor market.

7. In what way can the Italian context be considered a privileged field for studying the transmission of gender norms in the university environment?

One of the reasons why the transmission of gender norms is still little studied lies in the lack of data or contexts allowing for fine-grained analysis. Italy offers a particularly favorable framework for this type of study, as it presents both strong regional heterogeneity — gender norms and female labor force participation vary considerably from one region to another — and significant student mobility, with many students leaving their home province to study elsewhere. This combination makes university programs very geographically diverse and constitutes an ideal field for understanding to what extent socialization with peers from more or less egalitarian regions influences women’s professional choices.

8. Why are peer effects asymmetrical according to the geographical origins of female students?

One of the main results of the article is that being alongside female students from regions where female labor force participation is higher increases women’s probability of full-time employment and encourages them to move toward better-paying jobs. These peer effects are very asymmetrical: it is especially women from less egalitarian backgrounds who benefit from them. This finding is consistent with a mechanism of social learning: these women revise their initially more pessimistic expectations thanks to the information and experiences shared by their peers from more egalitarian regions.

9. How could your work shed light on the design of more gender-equal public policies? And to what extent can the results of your research be generalized to other countries or cultural contexts?

My study suggests two main avenues for public policies. On the one hand, promoting geographical diversity in higher education, since encouraging regional mix among students could help transform gender norms and promote greater equality between men and women in the labor market.

On the other hand, reducing informational asymmetries: my results show that there are significant differences in access to information depending on women’s geographical origins. Implementing policies aimed at correcting these gaps — for example, through targeted dissemination programs on careers and opportunities — could significantly improve the professional prospects of women from less egalitarian contexts.

10. Do you plan to promote your research beyond the academic framework?

I consider research dissemination to be an essential aspect, to which I would like to devote time in the future. At the risk of being a bit naïve, I believe that spreading scientific results, particularly to civil society, can help improve the quality of democracy. During my PhD, I did not really devote myself to this, as I preferred to focus on my training and on scientific production. But in the future, I clearly wish to reserve part of my time to making my research accessible to as many people as possible.

11. What are your professional prospects, in the short and long term?

I will continue along the academic path. After my PhD, I will do a one-year post-doctorate at Bocconi University in Milan, then I will join Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU) of Munich as an assistant professor. I will certainly continue my research on labor market inequalities, and I also look forward to starting to teach courses on these same topics.