Social risks of family carers in the context of welfare state policies




European welfare states, care policy, family care, social risks, welfare regime


Objective: To determine how European care policies for older people differ in terms of their potential social risks to family carers, as well as the extent to which these differences can be explained by different types of welfare and care regime.

Background: It is often assumed that welfare state support for family care entails high social risks to the carer, such as loss of employment income and social security rights. This paper challenges these assumptions and argues that care policies that generously support family carers might also alleviate some of the social risks related to family care.

Method: This paper introduces an innovative approach to systematically measuring the generosity of policies that support family carers, and it theorises how these policies connect to family carers' social risks. It then applies this approach to a comparative study of five European welfare states based on analyses of these countries’ care policy documents, standardised policy reports by national experts and data from comparative social policy databases.

Results: The findings reveal large cross-national differences in care policy design, which is only in some cases able to significantly mitigate social risks for family carers. Furthermore, these cross-national differences only partly correspond with assumptions based on welfare and care regime affiliation according to classic typologies.

Conclusion: The paper sheds new light on the ways in which welfare states design their policies towards family carers, and on the extent to which these policies are associated with social risks.


Anttonen, A., & Zechner, M. (2011). Theorizing Care and Care Work. In B. Pfau-Effinger & T. Rostgaard (Eds.), Care between work and welfare in European societies (pp. 15–34). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI:

Arciprete, C., Ciani, F., Galanti, T., Jessoula, M., & Pedersini, R. (2021). Report on the social protection system in Italy. EUROSHIP.

Bambra, C. (2004). The worlds of welfare: illusory and gender blind? Social Policy and Society, 3(3): 201–211. DOI:

Bettio, F., & Plantenga, J. (2004). Comparing care regimes in Europe. Feminist Economist, 10(1): 85–113. DOI:

Bettio, F., & Verashchagina, A. (2012). Long-term care for the elderly: Provision and providers in 33 European countries. Publications Office of the European Union.

Bouget, D., Spasova, S., & Vanhercke, B. (2016). Work-life balance measures for persons of working age with dependent relatives in Europe. A study of national policies. European Social Policy Network (ESPN).

Brimblecombe, N., Pickard, L., King, D., & Knapp, M. (2018). Perceptions of unmet needs for community social care services in England. A comparison of working carers and the people they care for. Health and Social Care in the Community, 25: 435–446. DOI:

Ciccia, R., & Sainsbury, D. (2018). Gendering welfare state analysis: tensions between care and paid work. European Journal of Politics and Gender, 1(1): 93–109. DOI:

Colombo, F., Llena-Nozal, A., Mercier, J., & Tjadens, F. (2011). Help wanted? Providing and paying for long-term care. OECD. DOI:

Courtin, E., Jemiai, N., & Mossialos, E. (2014). Mapping support policies for informal carers across the European Union. Health Policy, 118(1): 84–94. DOI:

Daly, M. (2020). Gender Inequality and Welfare States in Europe. Edward Elgar. DOI:

Daly, M., & Lewis, J. (2000). The concept of social care and the analysis of contemporary welfare states. British Journal of Sociology, 51(2): 281–298. DOI:

Deusdad, B. A., Pace, C., & Anttonen, A. (2016). Facing the challenges in the development of long-term care for older people in Europe in the context of an economic crisis. Journal of Social Service Research, 42(2): 144–150. DOI:

Eggers, T., Grages, C., Pfau-Effinger, B., & Och, R. (2020). Re-conceptualising the relationship between de-familialisation and familialisation and the implications for gender equality – the case of long-term care policies for older people. Ageing and Society, 40(4), 869–895. DOI:

Eggers, T., Grages, C., & Pfau-Effinger, B. (2022). Care-Politiken, soziale Risiken und Geschlechterungleichheit im internationalen Vergleich. In U. Knobloch, H. Theobald, C. Dengler, A.-C. Kleinert, C. Gnadt, & H. Lehner (Eds.), Caring Societies – Sorgende Gesellschaften: Neue Abhängigkeiten oder mehr Gerechtigkeit? (pp. 38–65). Beltz Juventa.

Ehrlich, U., Minkus, L., & Hess, M. (2020). Einkommensrisiko Pflege? Der Zusammenhang von familiärer Pflege und Lohn. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 53(1): 22–28. DOI:

Eichler, M., & Pfau-Effinger, B. (2009). The ‘consumer principle’ in the care of elderly people: Free choice and actual choice in the German welfare state. Social Policy & Administration, 43(6): 617–633. DOI:

Esping-Andersen, G. (1987). The comparison of policy regimes. In M. Rein, G. Esping-Andersen, & L. Rainwater (Eds.), The stagnation and renewal in social policy (pp. 3–13). M.E. Sharpe.

Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press. DOI:

Eurostat (2018). European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions. [retrieved January 30, 2023]

Fenger, M. (2007). Welfare regimes in Central and Eastern Europe: Incorporating post-communist countries in a welfare regime typology. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Social Science, 3(2): 1–30.

Ferragina, E., Seeleib-Kaiser, M., & Spreckelsen, T. (2015). The four worlds of ‘welfare reality’ – Social risks and outcomes in Europe. Social Policy & Society, 14(2): 287–307. DOI:

Ferrera, M. (1996): The ‘Southern model’ of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6(1): 17–37. DOI:

Fraser, N. (1994). After the family wage: Gender equity and the welfare state. Political Theory, 22(4): 591–618. DOI:

Frericks, P. (2021). How to quantify qualitative characteristics of societal differences: A method for systematic comparison of qualitative data (SCQual). International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 25(3): 311–322. DOI:

Frericks, P., Jensen, P. H., & Pfau-Effinger, B. (2014). Social rights and employment rights related to family care: Family care regimes in Europe. Journal of Aging Studies, 29: 66–77. DOI:

Geissler, B. & Pfau-Effinger, B. (2005): Change in European care arrangements. In B. Pfau-Effinger & B. Geissler (Eds.), Care and social integration in European societies (pp. 3–19). Policy Press. DOI:

Gerlinger, T. (2018). ESPN thematic report on challenges in long-term care – Germany. European Commission.

Glendinning, C. (2018). ESPN thematic report on challenges in long-term care – United Kingdom. European Commission.

Gori, C., Fernandez, J.-L., & Wittenberg, R. (Eds.) (2016). Long-term care reforms in OECD countries. Policy Press. DOI:

Gottschall, K. (2018). Arbeit, Beschäftigung und Arbeitsmarkt aus der Genderperspektive. In F. Böhle, G. G. Voß, & G. Wachtler (Eds.), Handbuch Arbeitssoziologie (pp. 361–395). Springer VS. DOI:

Grages, C., Eggers, T., & Pfau-Effinger, B. (2021). Long-term care regimes in Europe (EUROSHIP Working Paper No. 6). Oslo Metropolotan University.

Grødem, A. S. (2016). ESPN thematic report on work-life balance measures for persons of working age with dependent relatives in Norway. European Commission.

Grødem, A. S. (2018). ESPN thematic report on challenges in long-term care – Norway. European Commission.

Halvorsen, R., Harsløf, I., Hvinden, B., & Schoyen, M. (2021). Report on the social protection system in Norway. EUROSHIP.

Hess, M., De Tavernier, W., & Naegele, L. (2020). Culture Matters – Normen, Erwerbstätigkeit und informelle Pflege von älteren Frauen in Europa. Sozialer Fortschritt, 69(10): 667–685. DOI:

Jenson, J. (2015). The fading goal of gender equality: Three policy directions that underpin the resilience of gendered socio-economic inequalities. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 22(4): 539–560. DOI:

Jessoula, M., Pavolini, E., Raitano, M., & Natili, M. (2018). ESPN thematic report on challenges in long-term care – Italy. European Commission.

Kadi, S., Rodrigues, R., Kahlert, R., Hofmann, S. & Bauer, G. (2022). Does the family care best? Ideals of care in a familialistic care regime. Journal of Social Policy, 1–18. DOI:

Knijn, T., & Kremer, M. (1997). Gender and the caring dimension of welfare states: Toward inclusive citizenship. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 4(3): 328–362. DOI:

Kodate, N., & Timonen, V. (2017). Bringing the family in through the back door: The stealthy expansion of family care in Asian and European long-term care policy. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 32(3): 291–301. DOI:

Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative text analysis: A guide to methods, practice & using software. Sage. DOI:

Lamura, G., Polverini, F., Principi, A., Balducci, C., Melchiorre, G.M., Quattrini, S., & Gianelli, M.V. (2004). National background report for Italy. EUROFAMCARE.

Le Bihan, B., Lamura, G., Marcak, J., Fernandez, J.-L., Johansson, L., & Sowa-Kofta, A. (2019a). Policy measures adopted to support unpaid care across Europe. Eurohealth, 25(4): 10–15.

Le Bihan, B., Da Roit, B., & Sopadzhiyan, A. (2019b). The turn to optional familialism through the market: Long‐term care, cash‐for‐care, and caregiving policies in Europe. Social Policy & Administration, 53(4): 579–595. DOI:

Leitner, S. (2003). Varieties of familialism: The caring function of the family in comparative perspective. European Societies, 5(4): 353–375. DOI:

Lewis, J. (1992). Gender and the development of welfare regimes. Journal of European Social Policy, 2(3): 159–173. DOI:

Lewis, J., & Giullari, S. (2005). The adult worker model family, gender equality and care: the search for new policy principles and the possibilities and problems of a capabilities approach. Economy and Society, 34(1): 76–104. DOI:

Lister, R. (1994). “She has other duties” – Women, citizenship and social security. In S. Baldwin & J. Falkingham (Eds.), Social security and social change. New challenges to the Beveridge model (pp. 31–44). Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Möhring, K. (2015). Employment Histories and Pension Incomes in Europe. European Societies, 17(1): 3–26. DOI:

Morgan, F. (2018). The Treatment of informal care-related risks as social risks: an analysis of the English care policy system. Journal of Social Policy, 47(1): 179–196. DOI:

Mozhaeva, I. (2019). Who cares? Evidence on informal and formal home care use in Estonia. Baltic Journal of Economics, 19(1): 136–154. DOI:

Naldini, M., Pavolini, E., & Solera, C. (2016). Female employment and elderly care: The role of care policies and culture in 21 European countries. Work, Employment and Society, 30(4): 607–630. DOI:

Novotna, L. (2021). Freedom and gender equality in EU family policy tools. Social Policy & Society, 1–18. DOI:

OECD. (2020). Who cares? Attracting and retaining care workers for the elderly. OECD Health Policy Studies. OECD Publishing. DOI:

OECD. (2022). Taxing Wages 2022. OECD Publishing.

ONS. (2020). Statistical bulletin on average household income, UK: financial year 2020. [retrieved February 15, 2022]

Orloff, A. S. (1993). Gender and the social rights of citizenship: The comparative analysis of gender relations and welfare states. American Sociological Review, 58(3): 303–328. DOI:

Paat-Ahi, G., & Masso, M. (2018). ESPN thematic report on challenges in long-term care – Estonia. European Commission.

Pfau-Effinger, B. (2004). Historical paths of the male breadwinner family model – Explanation for cross-national differences. British Journal for Sociology, 55(3): 177–199. DOI:

Pierson, P. (Ed.) (2001). The New Politics of the Welfare State. Oxford University Press. DOI:

Ranci, C., & Pavolini, E. (2015). Not all that glitters is gold – Long-term care reforms in the last two decades in Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 25(3): 270–285. DOI:

Rubery, J., & Figueiredo, H. (2018). Gender, employment and society. In S. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook on Gender and Social Policy (129–153). Edward Elgar.

Rummery, K. (2021). Gender equality and the governance of long-term care policy: new comparative models and paradigms. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 37(1): 16–33. DOI:

Saraceno, C. (2016). Varieties of familialism: Comparing four southern European and East Asian welfare regimes. Journal of European Social Policy, 26(4): 314–326. DOI:

Saraceno, C., & Keck, W. (2011). Towards an integrated approach for the analysis of gender equity in policies supporting paid work and care responsibilities. Demographic Research, 25(11): 371–406. DOI:

Spasova, S., Baeten, R., Coster, S., Ghailani, D., Pena-Casas, R., & Vanhercke, B. (2018). Challenges in long-term care in Europe. European Commission.

Taru, M., Unt, M., & Täht, K. (2021). Report on the social protection system in Estonia. EUROSHIP.

Theobald, H. (2012). Home-based Care Provision within the German Welfare Mix. Health and Social Care in the Community, 20(3): 274–282. DOI:

Theobald, H., Szebehely, M., Saito, Y., & Ishiguro, N. (2018). Marketisation policies in different contexts: Consequences for home-care workers in Germany, Japan and Sweden. International Journal of Social Welfare, 27(3): 215–225. DOI:

Thomas, C. (1993). De-constructing concepts of care. Sociology, 27(4): 649–669. DOI:

Ungerson, C. (2004). Whose empowerment and independence? A cross-national perspective on cash for care schemes. Ageing and Society, 24(2): 189–212. DOI:

Ungerson, C., & Yeandle, S. (Eds.) (2007). Cash for Care in Developed Welfare States. Palgrave Macmillan.

Verbakel, E. (2014). Informal caregiving and well-being in Europe: What can ease the negative consequences for caregivers? Journal of European Social Policy, 24(5): 424–441. DOI:

Verdin, R., & O’Reilly, J. (2021). Report on the social protection system in the United Kingdom. EUROSHIP.

Võrk, A., Paat-Ahi, G., & Biin, H. (2016). ESPN thematic report on work-life balance measures for persons of working age with dependent relatives in Estonia. European Commission.

Wagner, M., & Brandt, M. (2018). Long-term care provision and the well-being of spousal caregivers: An analysis of 138 European regions. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 73(4): 24–34. DOI:

Yamane, S. (2021). Gender equality, paid and unpaid care and domestic work: Disadvantages of state-supported marketization of care and domestic work. The Japanese Political Economy, 47(1): 44–63. DOI:

Zigante, V. (2018). Informal care in Europe – Exploring ormalization, availability and quality. European Commission.




How to Cite

Eggers, T., & Grages, C. (2023). Social risks of family carers in the context of welfare state policies. Journal of Family Research, 35, 304–325.

Funding data