Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Birgit Pfau-Effinger, University of Hamburg Erosion of the boundaries between formal and informal work in Europe ESPAnet/RECWOWE Second joint Doctoral Workshop University of Hamburg, October 5-6, 2007
central questions • How can the development of care work be analysed? • Which factors contribute to explaining the development towards new forms of care work?
research basis • COST A13 Action Programme of the EU and European Science Foundation: ‚Change of Labour Markets, Welfare States and Citizenship‘, Coordinator of Working Group on ‚Social Care‘ • Coordinator of research project in the 5th EU Framework Programme Formal and Informal Work in Europe (FIWE)‚A Comparative Analysis of their Changing Relationship and their Impact on Social Integration‘, with research teams in six countries: Finland, Denmark, Germany, UK, Poland, Spain • Research project of the German Research Foundation (DFG) ‚Local policies towards long-term care in a comparative perspective‘
main assumptions • Change of care work is a multi-dimensional process; it is based on change in different dimensions which take place relatively independent from each other. • Different new forms of care work have been established in European societies. • As a consequence of such processes, the boundaries between private and public, informal and formal care work, unpaid and paid care work have blurred. • Cultural differences, differences in welfare state policies, and socio-economical change, and their interplay, contribute substantially to cross-national differences in the role of new forms of care work.
structure of the presentation 1. Problems of the ‚old‘, dual concept of care work • Towards a multi-dimensional approach to analyses of the development of care work • Factors that are promoting the development towards the different new forms of care work • Cross-national differences in relation to the new forms of care work and their explanation • Conclusions
the ‚old‘, dual concept of care work • A thinking in dual terms predominates in feminist thinking with regard to the concept of care, in terms of the comparison of public and private, of unpaid family work and paid gainful employment. • This is linked with a dual approach towards the separation of public and private in sociological theory and political sciences (Parsons, Habermas, Locke). • In this regard, formal and informal care work are often construed as opposites. • In feminist thinking, the formalised forms of care are often characterised as modern and family-friendly, because they relieve women from care work at home, while the informal care of children and the elderly tends to be linked to backwardness and social marginalisation of those who practise it (see also Cousins 1998).
problems of the concept • The clear embedding of care work in one of the two spheres of family and gainful employment tends to hinder the recognition of changes that concern the informal care work itself. • These have taken place precisely in an area between the two spheres. • Change has led to an erosion of the boundaries between formal and informal care work.
new concepts for analyses of family policies and care • formalisation (Theobald 2005) • de-familisation (Esping-Andersen 1996; Lister 1998) • commodification (Ungerson 2005; Ostner/Knijn 2005). problems • They do not really overcome the restrictions of the old dichotomy. • They do not clearly distinguish between different dimensions of the development of care work. • These approaches are more adequate for analyses of policies towards care work than for exact analyses of change that takes place in care work itself.
2. Towards a multi-dimensional approach to analyses of the development of care work
analytical framework: five dimensions of change of care work • Change in the type of workers by which care work is provided care can be provided by family members, by paid employees in the family or outside the family, • Change in the societal sphere in which care work is provided shift from care work within the family to other societal spheres outside the family (state, non-profit-sector, market) • Change in the degree of formality of care work Informal care work is not regulated semi-formal care is regulated on the basis of welfare state schemes for family care providers (maternity leave, parental leave, childcare allowance, long-term care insurance) (Pfau-Effinger 2005; Geissler/Pfau-Effinger 2005) Formal care work is regulated on the basis of the employment of the care workers • Change in the degree and type of payment The pay of care work can have different sources, market based wages or financial transfer in the context of welfare state programmes (Ungerson 2005). • Change in the gender composition of care work
five main trends in relation to these dimensions • type of worker: Increase in professional and non-professional employees outside the family, and hired employees within the family • societal sphere: Outsourcing of care work, mainly to state organisations, otherwise non-profit organisations, moderately to market enterprises (Pfau-Effinger et al. 2008) • degree of formality: Increase in formal forms of care work (Anttonen/Sipilä 2005; Theobald 2005, OECD 2002) and semi-formal forms • pay: Increase in different forms of paid care work, either by forms of decommodification of parents or providers of long-term care, or direct pay to caring family members, to employees within or outside the family (Ungerson 2005), • gender composition: moderate increase in the contribution of men to family based care work (Blossfeld/Drobnic 2002).
paid formal Formalised care work in gainful employment outside (and inside) the family Semi-formal family care work on the basis of welfare state programmes - with increase in share of fathers Informal, paid care work by employees (‚undeclared work‘) in the family household Informal Historical starting point in West European Societies: Informal unpaid family care Table 1: trend towards (mainly) three new forms of care work 1990s until 2006 unpaid
three main new forms of care work • formal care work in gainful employment in organisations/institutions outside the family, such as state/municipal sector, the non-profit sector and the market (Anttonen/Sipilä 2005; Theobald 2005, OECD 2002, Häußermann/Siebel 1996) • Semi-formal care work in the family household, in part by fathers • informal, paid care work by employees (‚undeclared work‘) in the family household
3. Factors that are promoting the development towards the different new forms of care work
Graph 1: Explanation of the structures of care work in the context of the societal ‚arrangement of work and family‘ Culture = constructions of sense to which people orient in their behaviour, it includes values, models and stocks of knowledge (Neidhard 1992; Lepsius 1990; Archer 1995) An arrangement is negotiated, it can be contradictory and contested and subject of change. Pfau-Effinger 2004
Factors contributing to high share offormalised care work in gainful employment • Cultural factors gender equality as popular value relatively low appreciation of family care (Pfau-Effinger 2004) • welfare state policies extended social rights to receive care (Knijn/Kremer 1997) comprehensive publicly financed sector of social services • socio-economical structures individualisaton (Beck 2000; Beck-Gernsheim 2001) high female labor force participation trend towards service society
factors contributing to high share of semi-formal care work in the family household • cultural factors relatively high appreciation of family care new model of family care by parents as specific life phases of self-fulfillment embedded in an otherwise employment oriented job history • welfare state policies extended social rights to give care, together with pay for care (Knijn/Kremer 1997) to some parts, but less relevant: insufficient public provision of childcare in part: reduction of costs for care as policy aim • socio-economic factors moderate role of mass unemployment (contested issue: see Haataja 2005) • EU policies guideline for parental leave
Factors contributing to high share of informal, paid care work by employees (‚undeclared work‘) in the family household • cultural change relatively highcultural appreciation of ‚family childhood‘ cultural tradition/acceptance of ‚servant‘ employment in the household • welfare state policies limited degree of de-commodification of the unemployed barriers to formal employment of migrants gaps in state support allowing career/family conflicts to be resolved • socio-economical structures size and degree of affluence of middle classes mass unemployment increase of global mobility of the labour force
4. Cross-national differences in relation to the new forms of care work and their explanation
Table 2: Employment rates of mothers with children aged under 6 (OECD 2001)
Problem: missing data • Missing cross-national data about the share of the population who are doing childcare in full-time, part-time; • Missing possibility to differentiate between parents who provide informal unpaid and semi-formal paid family care; • Missing information about relationship of ‚principle‘ public supply of public childcare on the basis of socal rights, and real take-up rates; • Missing differentiation in data about undeclared work in private households between cleaing and care; • Attitude are often outdated, they do not differentiate in an adequate way.
Table 3: Cross-national differences in relation to new forms of care work in childcare
Main assumptions • The role of each of the new forms of care work can to a substantial degree be explained by the interplay of the dominant cultural family model/s with the respective welfare regime. • cultural family models are to a substantial degree relevant with respect to the degree to which care work is provided within the family. • The welfare regime type (Esping-Andersen 1990, 1999) is more relevant with respect to the forms in which care work is provided within the family and without the family.
definitions • culture: constructions of sense to which people orient in their behaviour, it includes values, models and stocks of knowledge (Neidhard 1992; Lepsius 1990; Archer 1995) • cultural family models: basic ideas in a society which are related to the family, the organisation of care work in society, the gender division of labour and the relationship of the family with the employment system
Table 4: Degree of appreciation of family based care in different cultural models of the family
Table 5: New forms of care work in the context of the interaction of cultural values and welfare regimes (Esping-Andersen) in different arrangements of work and family
4. Conclusions • The boundaries between informal, unpaid care work in the private sector on one hand, formal paid care work in the public sector on the other are eroding. • Theoretical concepts which are based on a dichotomous thinking are not adequate to analysing such change. • A multi-dimensional approach is useful for adequate analyses of the development of the structures of care work. • It turns out that the introduction of pay for care work is not closely linked with a specific form of care work; instead, pay can be connected with informal, semi-formal and formal care work, within and outside the family. • The role of each new form of care work can be explained in the context of the arrangement of work and family in a society, which is based on the interaction of cultural, institutional, and socio-economic factors.
formalised care work in gainful employment in the context of work-family arrangements in Europe
formalised care work in gainful employment in the context of work-family arrangements in Europe
Informal employment (‚undeclared work‘) for care in the private household in the context of work-family arrangements in Europe
3. Factors that are driving the development towards the different new forms of care work
the central dimensions of the gender culture include values and models in relation to... • the main sphere/s of work of women and men • the societal appreciation of each of these sphere • the degree of dependence/autonomy in the relationship of spouses • the adequate sphere for the upbringing of children (family, or external childcare provision)
Two different typical paths of work-family arrangements: the impact of history
basis of change- tensions, contradictions, conflicts (Lockwood 1964; Archer 1996) - tensions and contradictions at the system level - within the cultural system or the social system- tensions and contradictions between the cultural and social system - conflicts at the socio-cultural level, that means in the relations between social actors