Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Informal care and gifts to and from older people in Europe: The interlinks between giving and receiving

Authors: Florian Tomini, Wim Groot, Sonila M. Tomini

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Transfers of money and help with daily activities by family and friends are important sources of support for older people and contribute to their well being. On the other hand, older adults are not only recipients of support but also important providers of support and financial transfers as giving and receiving are often reciprocal. For this, it is important to understand the determinants of receiving and giving money and help as well as the relationship between these two.

Methods

The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between giving and receiving of the same or of different types of transfers as well as to get more insights in the motivation behind giving and receiving of money gifts or informal care. We use data from the Survey of Health Aging and Retirement in Europe and employ a multinomial logit model to analyse 16 different categories resulting from combining information on the incidence of giving and receiving of both informal care and financial gifts.

Results

We show that despite the differences that exist in the incidence of giving and receiving of both informal care and financial gifts there are clearly a few patterns that are consistent between the European countries in our analysis. Both ‘altruistic-like’ and ‘exchange-like’ motives are more likely to increase by age, gender and physical proximity of network members, while ‘reciprocal-like’ giving and receiving is more likely among females and those with a network at close distance.

Conclusions

Our results show that the incidence of informal care and gifts to and from older people is related to particular characteristics and transfers patterns. Further research should be dedicated to exploring the situations leading to the ‘altruistic-like’ and ‘exchange-like’ combinations of transfers.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
See also Chiappori [21] and Browning et al. [69].
 
2
SHARE also provides information on the regular (daily or almost daily during at least three months) personal care (washing, getting out of bed, or dressing) given or received to/from any persons living in the same household. However, this is mostly provided between the households members and therefore it was not of interest for this paper.
 
Literature
1.
2.
Damiani G, Farelli V, Anselmi A, Sicuro L, Solipaca A, Burgio A, Iezzi D, Ricciardi W. Patterns of long term care in 29 European countries: evidence from an exploratory study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11(1):316.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Kehusmaa S, Autti-Rämö I, Helenius H, Rissanen P. Does informal care reduce public care expenditure on elderly care? estimates based on Finland’s Age study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13(1):317.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Kinsella KG, Phillips DR. Global aging: the challenge of success, vol. 60. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau; 2005.
5.
6.
Wittenberg R, Hu B, Hancock R, Morciano M, Comas-Herrera A, Malley J, King D. Projections of demand for and costs of social care for older people in England, 2010 to 2030, under current and alternative funding systems. 2011.
7.
Rechel B, Doyle Y, Grundy E, McKee M. How can health systems respond to population ageing? Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2009.
8.
Fernández J-L, Forder J, Trukeschitz B, Rokosová M, McDaid D. How can European states design efficient, equitable and sustainable funding systems for long-term care for older people? Policy Brief No.11. European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2009.
9.
Van Houtven CH, Norton EC. Informal care and health care use of older adults. J Health Econ. 2004;23(6):1159–80.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Charles KK, Sevak P. Can family caregiving substitute for nursing home care? J Health Econ. 2005;24(6):1174–90.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Bonsang E. Does informal care from children to their elderly parents substitute for formal care in Europe? J Health Econ. 2009;28(1):143–54.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Motel-Klingebiel A, Tesch-Roemer C, Von Kondratowitz H-J. Welfare states do not crowd out the family: evidence for mixed responsibility from comparative analyses. Ageing and Society. 2005;25(6):863–882.CrossRef
13.
Stoller EP. Exchange patterns in the informal support networks of the elderly: The impact of reciprocity on morale. J. Marriage Fam. 1985;47(2):335–342.
14.
Kolm S-C. Reciprocity: its scope, rationales, and consequences. In: Handbook on the economics of giving, reciprocity and altruism. 2006. p. 371–541.
15.
Attias-Donfut C, Ogg J, Wolff F-C. European patterns of intergenerational financial and time transfers. Eur J Ageing. 2005;2(3):161–73.CrossRef
16.
Richardson JC, Ong BN, Sim J. Experiencing chronic widespread pain in a family context: giving and receiving practical and emotional support. Sociol Health Illn. 2007;29(3):347–65.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Arrondel L, Masson A, xe. Family Transfers Involving Three Generations. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics. 2001;103(3):415–443.
18.
Becker GS. Altruism, egoism, and genetic fitness: economics and sociobiology. J Econ Lit. 1976;14(3):817–26.
19.
Kurz M. Altruism as an outcome of social interaction. Am Econ Rev. 1978;68(2):216–22.
20.
Becker GS. Altruism in the family and selfishness in the market place. Economica. 1981;48(189):1–15.CrossRef
21.
Chiappori P-A. Rational household labor supply. Econometrica. 1988;56(1):63–90.CrossRef
22.
Andreoni J. Giving with impure altruism: applications to charity and ricardian equivalence. J Polit Econ. 1989;97(6):1447–58.CrossRef
23.
Cox D, Rank MR. Inter-vivos transfers and intergenerational exchange. Rev Econ Stat. 1992;74(2):305–14.CrossRef
24.
Simon HA. Altruism and economics. Am Econ Rev. 1992;83(2):156–61.
25.
Altonji JG, Hayashi F, Kotlikoff LJ. Parental altruism and inter vivos transfers: theory and evidence. J Polit Econ. 1997;105(6):1121–66.CrossRef
26.
Laitner J. Wealth inequality and altruistic bequests. Am Econ Rev. 2002;92(2):270–3.CrossRef
27.
Arrondel L, Masson A. Chapter 14 Altruism, exchange or indirect reciprocity: what do the data on family transfers show? In: Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity. Volume Volume 2, edn. Edited by Serge-Christophe K, Jean Mercier Y. Elsevier; 2006. p 971–1053.
28.
Becker GS. A treatise on the family. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1981.
29.
Kolm S-C. Introduction to the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity. In: Kolm S-C, Ythier JM, editors. Handbook on the Economics of Giving, Reciprocity and Altruism. Volume 1. Elsevier; 2006: 1–114.
30.
Trivers RL. The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Q Rev Biol. 1971;46(1):35.CrossRef
31.
Wilson David S, Wilson Edward O. Rethinking the theoretical foundation of sociobiology. Q Rev Biol. 2007;82(4):327–48.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Batson CD, Powell AA. Altruism and prosocial behavior, Handbook of psycholog. 2003.CrossRef
33.
Alessie R, Angelini V, Pasini G. Is it true love? Altruism versus exchange in time and money transfers. De Economist. 2014;162(2):193–213.CrossRef
34.
Arrow KJ. Gifts and exchanges. Philos Public Aff. 1972;1(No. 4):343–62.
35.
Cox D, Jakubson G. The connection between public transfers and private interfamily transfers. J Public Econ. 1995;57(1):129–67.CrossRef
36.
Bernheim BD, Shleifer A, Summers LH. The strategic bequest motive. J Labor Econ. 1986;4(No. 3):S151–82. Part 2: The Family and the Distribution of Economic Rewards.CrossRef
37.
Kathleen M. Inter vivos transfers and intended bequests. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research; 1997.
38.
Light A, McGarry K. Why parents play favorites: explanations for unequal bequests. Am Econ Rev. 2004;94(5):1669–81.CrossRef
39.
Ferrara EL. Kin groups and reciprocity: a model of credit transactions in Ghana. Am Econ Rev. 2003;93(5):1730–51.CrossRef
40.
Koh S-K, MacDonald M. Financial reciprocity and elder care: interdependent resource transfers. J Fam Econ Iss. 2006;27:420–36.CrossRef
41.
Cox D. Motives for private income transfers. J Polit Econ. 1987;95(3):508–46.CrossRef
42.
Bernheim BD, Shleifer A, Summers LH. The strategic bequest motive. J Polit Econ. 1985;93(6):1045–76.CrossRef
43.
Polanyi K. The great transformation: the social and political origins of Our time. Boston: Beacon; 1957.
44.
Kolm S-C. The logic of good social relations. Ann Public Coop Econ. 2000;71(2):171–89.CrossRef
45.
Lyberaki A, Tinios P, Mimis A, Georgiadis T. Mapping population aging in Europe: how are similar needs in different countries met by different family structures? J Maps. 2013;9(1):4–9.CrossRef
46.
Andreoni J. An experimental test of the public-goods crowding-Out hypothesis. Am Econ Rev. 1993;83(5):1317–27.
47.
Albertini M, Kohli M, Vogel C. Intergenerational transfers of time and money in European families: common patterns different regimes? J Eur Soc Policy. 2007;17(4):319–34.CrossRef
48.
Kohli M, Künemund H. In: Bengtson VL, Lowenstein A, editors. Intergenerational Transfers in the Family: What Motivates Giving? New York: Global Aging and Challenges to Families; 2003. p. 123–42.
49.
Kohli M, Künemund H, Vogel C. Intergenerational family transfers in Europe – a comparative analysis. In: 7th European sociological association (ESA) conference. Torun: Research Network on Ageing; 2005.
50.
Guth W, Offerman T, Potters J, Strobel M, Verbon HAA. Are family transfers crowded out by public transfers? Scand J Econ. 2002;104(4):587–604.CrossRef
51.
Tesch-Römer C, Motel-Klingebiel A, von Kondratowitz HJ. [Importance of family for quality of life of the elderly in a social and cultural comparison]. Z Gerontol Geriatr. 2002;35(4):335–342.
52.
Börsch-Supan A, Brandt M, Hunkler C, Kneip T, Korbmacher J, Malter F, Schaan B, Stuck S, Zuber S. Data resource profile: the survey of health, ageing and retirement in Europe (SHARE). Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42(4):992–1001.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
53.
Malter F, Börsch-Supan A. SHARE compliance profiles–wave 4. Munich: MEA, Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy; 2013.
54.
Wrzus C, Hänel M, Wagner J, Neyer FJ. Social network changes and life events across the life span: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2013;139(1):53–80.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Bolin K, Lindgren B, Lundborg P. Informal and formal care among single-living elderly in Europe. Health Econ. 2008;17(3):393–409.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Katz SJ, Kabeto M, Langa KM. GEnder disparities in the receipt of home care for elderly people with disability in the united states. JAMA. 2000;284(23):3022–7.CrossRefPubMed
57.
58.
Norton EC, Nicholas LH, Huang SS-H. Informal care and inter-vivos transfers: results from the national longitudinal survey of mature women. BE J Econ Anal Policy. 2013;14(2):377–400.
59.
Greene WH. Econometric Analysis. Pearson Education; 2003
60.
Long JS, Freese J. Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata. Stata press; 2006.
61.
Liang J, Krause NM, Bennett JM. Social exchange and well-being: is giving better than receiving? Psychol Aging. 2001;16(3):511.CrossRefPubMed
62.
Villanueva E. Inter vivos transfers and bequests in three OECD countries. Econ Policy. 2005;20(43):505–65.CrossRef
63.
Altonji JG, Hayashi F, Kotlikoff LJ. Is the extended family altruistically linked? direct tests using micro data. Am Econ Rev. 1992;82(5):1177–98.
64.
Österle A. Long-term care in central and south-eastern Europe: challenges and perspectives in addressing a ‘New’ social risk. Soc Policy Adm. 2010;44(4):461–80.CrossRef
65.
Bolin K, Lindgren B, Lundborg P. Your next of kin or your own career?: caring and working among the 50+ of Europe. J Health Econ. 2008;27(3):718–38.CrossRefPubMed
66.
Eswaran M, Kotwal A. A theory of gender differences in parental altruism. Can J Econ. 2004;37(4):918–50.CrossRef
67.
Chaudhuri A, Sbai E. Gender differences in trust and reciprocity in repeated gift exchange games. N Z Econ Pap. 2011;45(1–2):81–95.
68.
69.
Browning M, Bourguignon F, et al. Income and Outcomes: A Structural Model of Intrahousehold Allocation. J Pol Econ. 1994;102(6):1067–96.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Informal care and gifts to and from older people in Europe: The interlinks between giving and receiving
Authors
Florian Tomini
Wim Groot
Sonila M. Tomini
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1830-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Health Services Research 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research article

Reconfiguring health workforce: a case-based comparative study explaining the increasingly diverse professional roles in Europe

Research article

Factors influencing health care and service providers’ and their respective “at risk” populations’ adoption of the Air Quality Health Index (AQHI): a qualitative study

Research article

Performance-based financing in the context of the complex remuneration of health workers: findings from a mixed-method study in rural Sierra Leone

Research article

General practitioners’ perceptions of public reporting of institution and individual medicine prescribing data

Research article

Geographic variation in access among adults with kidney disease: evidence from medical expenditure panel survey, 2002–2011

Research article

Hospice care in the Netherlands: who applies and who is admitted to inpatient care?