34. microfinance, cooperatives and time banks: …people.usm.maine.edu/collom/ihapp.pdfmicrofinance,...

433

34. Microfinance, cooperatives and time banks: community- provided welfareEd Collom

1. INTRODUCTION

Grassroots activists have become increasingly creative in building solutions to contem-

porary social problems. Many of these issues stem from the shortcomings of two domi-

nant social institutions – the state and the economy. Citizens in post- industrial societies

have struggled to maintain an adequate standard of living as poverty, unemployment

and underemployment are persistent and growing problems under global capitalism.

Demographic changes and the resulting aging of our societies add further challenges to

economic well- being.

In this chapter, three examples of community- provided welfare are explored and

assessed in relation to aging and demographic changes. As Zack de la Rocha (1999)

rapped in a Rage Against the Machine song at the eve of the new millennium, ‘Hungry

people don’t stay hungry for long.’ People have become less reliant upon mainstream

social institutions and are creating local alternatives to complement or counter the capi-

talist economy and state. Microfinance, cooperatives and time banks are all examples of

communities engaging in do- it- yourself (DIY) efforts to increase access to resources. In

addition to the objectives of economic empowerment, such localism usually aims to build

social capital.

A number of interesting and important public policy issues emerge from localist,

DIY efforts. How can local, state and federal officials play a role in and support these

movements? Should scarce governmental resources be channeled toward them? Might

these movements ultimately be counter- productive, absolving authorities of traditional

responsibilities? These policy issues will be discussed below briefly, in the Conclusion. In

the next three sections, microfinance, cooperatives and time banks are described and then

assessed in relation to aging.

2. MICROFINANCE

Microfinance is an umbrella term referring to the provision of financial services to low-

income entrepreneurs who generally lack access to banks and are deemed ‘high- risk’

clients. While microfinance is found primarily in developing countries, immigration and

poverty have spurred its growth in post- industrial settings as well. The concept has gained

rather broad political support from both conservatives and liberals. Microcredit borrow-

ing groups are the predominant form of microfinance.

In the 1970s, nonprofit organizations in Latin America (Accion; see http://www.accion.

org/) and Bangladesh (Grameen; see http://www.grameenfoundation.org/) launched the

HARPER 97808567933904 PRINT (M3469) (G).indd 433 11/06/2014 15:35

434 International handbook on ageing and public policy

microcredit movement, which continues to grow and now reaches millions of clients

worldwide. These borrowing groups offer small loans to their members and are usually

sponsored and regulated by nongovernmental organizations or community banks. The

groups tend to be small (some as few as five members) and comprise mostly women,

particularly in the developing world. Credit is subject to the group’s approval and is only

available when all of the members are up to date with repayment of their loans. Thus

norms and group solidarity act as incentives for repayment (see Anthony 2005; Sanyal

2009). While it is not necessarily the case in post- industrial countries, members of micro-

credit borrowing groups usually know one another before joining a group. Such network

ties also increase group commitment. Typically, mandatory meetings take place on a

regular basis. In addition to making decisions about loans, the meetings also have social

purposes and bring entrepreneurs together.

Studies of microcredit borrowing groups indicate that group failure is relatively rare

and repayment rates tend to be very high (see Besley and Coate 1995; Woolcock 1998).

While this seems to suggest that these programs are efficacious, some scholars are highly

critical and argue that there are more important indicators than repayment rates that are

often not studied. For example, the change in the standard of living of the borrowers

and their households after microcredit participation is an important outcome to consider

(Brett 2006). The organizational success of the borrowing group or larger sponsor is not

necessarily indicative of individual borrower success. Indeed, multiple studies show that

entrepreneurs face very competitive markets for their goods (mostly clothing and crafts)

and that many are not earning enough from their businesses to pay off their loans (see

Woolcock 1999; Gill 2000; Bee 2011). Given high degrees of group commitment, this

sometimes results in dangerous sacrifices to the family’s food budget or borrowing from

family members to stay current on microcredit loans.

The microfinance movement has paid very little attention to aging and the needs of

older people. Microcredit, the key product from this industry, is clearly intended for

able- bodied entrepreneurs who can directly produce and sell goods. Some sponsoring

agencies have age restrictions that purposely exclude older people from participating.

As our societies continue to age and more individual microcredit borrowers become

older, it is imperative that the movement develop policies and practices in relation to

aging and elderly persons. Some have recommended the development of pension prod-

ucts and promotion of the necessity of saving money throughout one’s working life (see

van Dulleman 2011; Hatch 2011). Another possibility is microcredit partnerships that

connect generations (mothers and daughters, for example) early on, rather than the single

entrepreneur model.

Overall, microfinance appears to be a problematic and somewhat poor example of

community- provided welfare. This strategy aligns perfectly with neoliberalism and its

market- based approaches (see Johnson 1998). Microcredit is based on self- reliance and

economic individualism, simply assuming that there are mere capital constraints to eco-

nomic growth. It doing so, it ignores the underlying dynamics of poverty and the limita-

tions of market- based initiatives. By working within the system of global capitalism and

assuming that loans will launch the poor into productive enterprise, microfinance fails

to recognize social and political power relations and relieves governments of some of the

responsibility surrounding the welfare of their citizens. Feminists have also argued that

it ultimately neither challenges nor ameliorates gender inequality (see Sanyal 2009; Bee


Microfinance, cooperatives and time banks 435

2011). While participants may gain beneficial social outcomes, the ability of microfinance

to economically empower its clients over the long run is highly questionable and it does

not currently present adequate opportunities for older people.

3. COOPERATIVES

Cooperatives are member- owned, mutual- benefit associations surrounding the con-

sumption or production of goods or services. While microfinance seeks to integrate the

poor into the capitalist market economy as entrepreneurs, cooperatives first emerged as

a response and alternative to early industrial capitalism’s alienating factory conditions.

With consumer or producer ownership and control, co- ops represent a vehicle through

which ordinary people and communities can exercise greater influence over their own

economic destiny. In distinction to the capitalist market- driven model and the central

state model, co- ops are part of the ‘third way’.

According to the International Co- operative Alliance (2014), there are seven principles

through which co- ops put their values into practice: voluntary and open membership;

democratic member control; member economic participation; autonomy and inde-

pendence; education, training and information; cooperation among cooperatives; and

concern for community. These principles assist in the creation and maintenance of such

self- help organizations by making them transparent and participatory, in distinction to

capitalist as well as state- owned and -controlled firms.

There are at least four different categories of cooperative types as well as hybrid forms

(National Cooperative Business Association 2012). These include: worker, producer, con-

sumer, and purchasing co- ops. The first two types encompass the production of goods or

services, whereas the latter two concern consumption. Co- ops can serve and be formed

by either individuals, as in the worker and consumer varieties, or business organizations,

as in producer and purchasing cooperatives. Those focused on individual participants

appear to be most relevant for the issues surrounding demographic change and aging.

A worker cooperative is a business that is democratically governed and owned by its

employees. These tend to start as small businesses created by like- minded community

members with common objectives. Occasionally, the employees of an existing privately

held company decide to try to purchase it and convert it into a coop. When potential

worker- owners wish to join a coop, there is typically a probationary period followed by

a vote or consensus decision. If an applicant is approved, their equity share in the busi-

ness is usually deducted from their paychecks over time. The initial financing of a worker

cooperative is one of the first major decisions and often a challenge.

Since they are usually community- based, local businesses, worker co- ops are a form

of community development (Majee and Hoyt 2011; Schneiberg 2011). They gather local

people who pool their resources to participate in and influence market forces. Co- ops

also resonate with the concept of ‘buying local’ by helping to keep money circulating

within communities rather than enriching distant owners as in the case of many chain

stores. By creating jobs and providing incomes, worker co- ops have been advocated as

a solution to unemployment. With the globalization of production and the ‘race to the

bottom’, worker co- ops may help anchor work in distressed communities. They have also

been used by NGOs as a vehicle for poverty reduction in less economically developed



countries. Of course, worker co- ops are reliant upon consumers for their products and

face market pressures just as other for- profit businesses.

While these co- ops exist in a wide variety of industries, they are the least prevalent

type of cooperative. For example, data from the end of the 2000s indicate that only a

few hundred worker co- ops operate in the USA (Deller et al. 2009). Globally, the most

extensive occurrence of worker ownership and control is the Mondragon Corporation in

the Basque region of Spain (see http://www.mondragon- corporation.com/). Mondragon

is a federation of over 100 worker cooperatives (many of which are large manufacturing

firms) employing about 30 000 worker- owners. In the USA, the largest worker coop is

Cooperative Home Care Associates (see http://www.chcany.org/), with more than 1000

worker- owners providing home care services in the New York metropolitan area. The

nation’s largest retail worker coop is Rainbow Grocery (see http://www.rainbow.coop/),

a natural foods supermarket run by over 200 worker- owners in San Francisco, California.

Scholarly research finds that, relative to employees in the private sector, worker- owners

are more likely to report higher levels of job satisfaction, morale, and organizational

commitment and citizenship (Greenberg 1980; Hodson 2001; Rothschild 2009). Labor

productivity and survival rates also tend to be higher in worker co- ops (Rothschild and

Russell 1986; Russell 1993; Doucouliagos 1995). Benefit packages tend to be better in

cooperatives and their competitive wages come with the prospects of additional divi-

dends (Rothschild 2009; Miller 2012). There is also some empirical evidence that worker

ownership leads to greater civic and community engagement (Greenberg 1986; Majee

and Hoyt 2011).

When it comes to worker cooperatives, most of the potentially beneficial outcomes

directly affect only the worker- owners (though their products may contribute to their

consumers’ quality of life). To the extent that the elderly are more likely to be out of the

formal labor market, worker co- ops may not appear to be directly relevant. However,

long- term positive outcomes can be expected for worker- owners since better benefits and

working conditions lead to healthier lives later on. Moreover, the indirect effects that

co- ops potentially create by helping to keep money circulating locally and by building

community may benefit the elderly in those communities where they exist.

Consumer cooperatives are the most common form of coop. These often take the

form of retail outlets and represent consumer collaboration among members through

the joint purchase of goods or services. Unlike capitalist enterprises, consumer co- ops

are primarily concerned with delivering goods or services, not producing a profit. This

form of cooperative and the surrounding principles can be traced back to the Rochdale

Pioneers in Manchester, England, who opened a coop to sell flour to members in 1844

(Lindenfeld 1996). Rochdale evolved to become part of what is now the largest coop-

erative organization in the world. The Co- operative Group (see http://www.cooperative.

coop/) has over six million members, who purchase goods and services from a large family

of businesses in the food, travel, financial, healthcare, legal and electrical industries.

In the USA, credit unions and electric utility cooperatives are the most widespread

form of consumer co- ops. While worker co- ops employ and empower their member-

owners, individual members of consumer co- ops have relatively little direct voice other

than participating in elections for the board and votes on major policy changes. Boards

of consumer co- ops typically appoint a manager, who hires and supervises staff to run

the operations.



Some consumer cooperatives are formed by older people and these, as well as others,

are focused particularly on the needs of this age group. For example, senior housing

co- ops can offer safer and more affordable alternatives for older people to live independ-

ently in an apartment or townhome community. In the USA and many other places,

homeownership rates among older people are very high. Yet single- family homes become

increasingly difficult and expensive for older people to maintain and may contribute to

social isolation for some. Housing cooperatives for seniors may promote a higher quality

of life by encouraging community, offering more safely designed premises, and reducing

maintenance expenses and effort.

In addition to joining consumer co- ops that provide goods or services targeting the

elderly, seniors can reap the same benefits as all cooperative consumers. By offering

opportunities to save money and socialize with others through participation in these

community- based enterprises, consumer co- ops may be particularly important resources

for the elderly. Seniors may find it beneficial to support worker co- ops as well. As cited

above, home care services are among the wide variety available in some places from

worker- owners. To the extent that worker- owners are more satisfied and committed to

their businesses, they are likely to provide higher- quality services.

The types of cooperatives that serve organizations, producer and purchasing co- ops

appear less relevant to meeting the needs of older people. Producer co- ops are most com-

monly found in agriculture, where farms join together to increase their market power.

Instead of being reliant upon external, ‘middleman’ processors, producer co- ops provide

member farms with support by offering production, marketing, business and purchas-

ing services. Purchasing cooperatives are co- ops whose members are businesses seeking

to improve their competitiveness. By joining a purchasing coop, smaller businesses can

better compete against large chain stores. These cooperatives provide their members with

various services, including: purchasing of supplies, negotiating with vendors, product

branding, advertising and marketing, billing services, contracting for employee benefits,

training and consulting. The world’s largest hotel chain, Best Western, is a purchasing

coop owned by the independent operators of over 4000 hotels in 80 countries. In the

USA, more than 13 000 independent hardware stores belong to a purchasing cooperative.

Worker and consumer cooperatives are DIY, community- based initiatives seeking to

economically empower their members. They are a form of economic democracy that may

help mitigate class disparities by involving workers and consumers in making economic

decisions that affect their standard and quality of living. Given past evidence that coop-

erative activity increases in times of economic distress, it can be expected that the number

of these alternative organizations will expand as the global downturn that began in the

late 2000s continues to linger.

There is debate among the political left surrounding the role and implications of

worker co- ops as a viable, alternative model to the inequalities produced by global capi-

talism (see Schecter 1994; Ollman 1998). Critics could see cooperatives simply as a form

of ‘worker capitalism’, altering the agents, but not the larger shortcomings of capitalist

market dynamics (see Gunn 1984; Russell 1985). If cooperatives expanded, there would

be increased competition among them and the success of some could come at the expense

of others. Overall, it could be argued that cooperatives ultimately serve members’ inter-

ests, producing only private goods.

However, cooperatives do produce some public goods by promoting the local



circulation of capital. Co- ops are more likely to strengthen local economies by using the

services and goods provided by other local businesses. Moreover, the voice that members

of cooperatives have in their operations is more likely to extend beyond the bottom line.

Worker- owners and members of consumer co- ops are invested in their communities and

bring quality- of- life issues to the table. That is, they attempt to build social capital into

their local economies.

Despite being part of the ‘third way’, cooperatives need governmental support in the

form of legislation, loans, technical assistance, and perhaps even preferential contracting

measures. Having a more conducive environment would greatly assist this movement.

Cooperatives should reach out to government and NGOs for support. Stronger network

ties are also needed among cooperatives globally. Since co- ops cannot be expected to be

the sole solution, they need to coordinate their actions with other movements advocating

progressive political change.

By pooling community resources, and in some cases creating jobs, cooperatives offer

benefits in our aging societies. Worker- owners are likely to experience long- term positive

health outcomes. Indirectly, co- ops help keep money local and build social capital. Some

consumer cooperatives, such as those focused on senior housing, offer notable opportu-

nities for the elderly. In general, by enabling members to save money and build commu-

nity through social interactions, community co- ops appear to be an efficacious example

of community- provided welfare.

4. TIME BANKS

Time banks are service- exchange networks that employ an alternative, local currency in

an effort to make services and goods more accessible and to create community (see http://

timebanks.org/; http://www.timebanking.org/). While microfinance and cooperatives

offer various means of engaging in the formal economy, these DIY groups create new,

small economies. More than 1000 local currency networks have been launched around

the world since the early 1980s (Collom et al. 2012).

Though there are various models, and each system tends to have its own dynamics, the

basic premises of these networks are similar. Participants join and publicize the services

or goods that they wish to offer or obtain in an online or printed directory. A member

desiring something contacts the provider (or a staff person in some cases), negotiates the

transaction, and then arranges it. The recipient pays with, and the provider receives,

the local currency, which acts as a mechanism to store the value of the transaction so that

the credit can be used later with others in the network. This overcomes some of the limi-

tations of bartering, which requires two people wanting something that each other owns.

The basic idea underlying local currencies is to reduce the need for conventional money

by increasing access to resources in the community.

Advocates claim that local currencies can generate a variety of beneficial outcomes

(see Meeker- Lowry 1996; Cahn 2000; Williams et al. 2001; North 2006; Seyfang 2009).

The major types include: economic, social, health, ideological and environmental. There

are also different levels at which they can produce these effects. Individual members, par-

ticipating organizations and the wider community can all potentially experience positive

gains (Collom et al. 2012).



Local currencies are legal, though the specifics and taxation implications vary by

system type and country. In the USA, the birthplace of time banking, services exchanged

in these networks are tax exempt by ruling of the Internal Revenue Service. In time banks,

the currency is time itself – however long it takes to do something is what that labor is

worth. A participant spends an hour providing a service to another and then receives one

credit or ‘time dollar’ from the recipient’s account on reporting the transaction. All types

of work, and hence all workers, are equal in value in time banking.

The other two most prevalent forms of local currencies are LETS (Local Exchange

Trading Systems) and those modeled after Ithaca Hours in New York (Collom et al.

2012). These local currencies are pegged to their national currencies, and in the case of

the latter, come in printed form. As in time banking, they are primarily ‘neighbor- to-

neighbor’ programs, though some businesses and nonprofit organizations do partici-

pate. Additionally, there are other forms of local currencies that encourage community

members to buy local and support independent businesses. These are discount scrip

programs in which people can purchase the notes at a discount and use them for their full

value at participating local stores.

Time banks are the most widespread form of local currency and offer the most flex-

ible model. About half of the time banks in the USA are free- standing, community-

based organizations. These tend to be started and run by volunteers who invest a great

deal of time and energy in their networks. The other half exists within agencies such as

healthcare, social service, religious, or community revitalization organizations. Some of

these limit membership to those to whom they already serve (such as church members

or residents in active- adult communities). The majority of agency- based or ‘embedded’

time banks have paid staff to recruit participants, provide orientations, match providers

and recipients as needed, keep records, and troubleshoot. The more formal administra-

tive structure of time banks has helped make them more successful than other forms of

local currencies.

Research indicates that there were 128 time banks in the USA, serving over 23 000

members in 2010. In 2011, more than 20 000 residents of the UK were participating in

224 programs (Collom et al. 2012). These networks do not tend to be particularly large:

some of the best- established time banks have a few hundred participants exchanging

services in any given quarter.

The earliest time banks in the USA were embedded in healthcare agencies and referred

to as ‘service credit’ programs or banks. They were intra- generational programs, recruit-

ing older persons to help other older persons remain independent and in their homes.

All but one of these time banks eventually closed. Their operating costs for paid staff

tended to make them targets during periods of budget cuts and some found that their

benefits were difficult to quantify to executives. Yet in Brooklyn, New York, the Member

to Member time bank of Elderplan (a Medicare program; see Collom et al. 2012) still

exists more than 25 years later. The services most frequently exchanged in these ‘seniors

helping seniors’ programs include: transportation, help with errands, reading assistance,

medication reminders and friendly visiting. The formal market economy does not often

work well for such assistance, yet these are the very things that older people often need to

maintain independent living and a high quality of life.

Time banking is an example of co- production, the idea that all people are assets and

can contribute to society’s needs (see Cahn 2000). Instead of a model of passive recipients



consuming the services of charities or professionals, time banking attempts to transform

such relations into reciprocal ones. The argument is that all members of a community can

and should be agents of change. For example, place- bound older people often provide

services such as telephone companionship in these networks. By earning credits and using

them for services they need, members are empowered through co- production, overcom-

ing some of the stigma associated with traditional charity. Time bank participation can

increase the likelihood that one will feel needed or useful and build social capital by cre-

ating new social ties. While some programs focus only on older people, most time banks

have open memberships that can facilitate interactions outside of one’s age group. When

older people are in greater contact with younger people, there are possible health benefits.

Such ‘bridging’ social ties are a form of social integration.

Scholarly research on time banking indicates that most of these networks have pre-

dominantly female memberships (Collom et al. 2012). Nearly two- thirds of time bank

members in the USA are women. This is not necessarily surprising, since women have

historically provided the majority of informal, nonmarket labor and tend to volunteer

more than men. Given the relative devaluation of women’s work in the formal economy,

local currencies appear to offer greater opportunities to women.

In addition to Member to Member in Brooklyn, two other US time banks that have

been studied extensively are Community Exchange in Allentown, Pennsylvania and Hour

Exchange Portland in Maine (see http://tdn.timebanks.org/; http://www.hourexchange

portland.org/). Community Exchange was started in 1999 as an open- membership,

embedded time bank, housed in a large regional health and hospital network (the Lehigh

Valley Health Network). Hour Exchange Portland was founded in 1997 as a 501(c)(3)

nonprofit organization. This stand- alone, community- based time bank is a pioneer in the

movement and also has broad goals and membership available to all.

Nationally, the share of older people in time banks is roughly representative of the

larger US adult population. Given their different missions and community connections,

the age distribution of members within individual time banks varies tremendously.

Member to Member is limited exclusively to elderly participants, about one- third of

the membership of Community Exchange is aged 65 or older, whereas older members

are slightly underrepresented at Hour Exchange Portland when compared to the city of

Portland, Maine.

People join time banks for a variety of reasons and age has been found to influence

such motivations in open- membership programs. Older members are more likely to state

that they join to help others (altruistic reasons) and to meet new people (social motiva-

tions). Studies concerning participation rates by age find that there is no statistical asso-

ciation. Elderly members are as active (engaging in similar numbers of exchanges) as the

non- elderly on average. Investigations of who trades with whom have shown that elderly

members are most likely to exchange with other members who are 65 or older (creating

more ‘bonding’ social capital) (see Collom et al. 2012).

Elderly participants do not appear to differ substantially from the memberships of

their time banks as a whole in the services that they exchange. Health and wellness

services are very popular at the Hour Exchange Portland. There are many members,

including a nonprofit alternative healthcare organization, offering a variety of health-

related services. These are tremendous resources, particularly for under- and uninsured

members. At Member to Member and Community Exchange, companionship services



and transportation are among the most frequently exchanged. The opportunities for

social engagement in both of these time banks are high. Program support is usually an

oft- provided service as well. Most time banks rely on their members’ assistance with the

tasks involved in running the program.

As far as the outcomes of time bank participation are concerned, research shows that

social benefits, economic benefits (saving money) and values benefits (the ability to act on

one’s beliefs) are all usually rated highly by members. There have not tended to be many

age differences in the likelihood of reporting these benefits, however (see Collom et al.

2012).

Time banks are noteworthy for their ability to form new economies by tapping into the

labor power of a community and creating a new currency based on the sharing of time.

These DIY networks generate new cash- free resources for participants and the movement

has been growing since the recession of the late 2000s.

While these systems are intended to be long- lasting, they are not meant to replace

conventional money. Since they complement the formal economy, they are often referred

to as ‘complementary currencies’ (see Seyfang 2009). Thus, as in the case of coopera-

tives, they are limited vehicles of social change since they do not counter or replace the

mainstream economy. Nonetheless, there are certainly anti- capitalist tendencies at work

in local currencies. Time banking’s egalitarianism, an hour for an hour regardless of skill,

represents a radical departure from the economic status quo.

While some time bank members are politically motivated, wanting to support the prac-

tice of an alternative economy, others are not and see participation as an opportunity to

give back to others and make new friends. LETS and Ithaca Hours systems have tended

to be more political projects, framed as alternatives to capitalism, whereas time bank

advocates have purposely tended to be more value- neutral. Not surprisingly, the latter

have received greater support from policy makers (see North 2006; Collom et al. 2012).

Time banks do appear to offer a viable solution to ameliorate some of the social

problems encountered in our aging societies. They provide additional opportunities for

older people to participate in their communities by giving and receiving services. While

scholarship in this area is scant, the opportunity for the elderly to contribute and provide

services to others has the potential to generate mental health outcomes surrounding self-

efficacy. Spending time credits to receive services and socializing more often with others

also have the potential to create positive health effects. The ability to save money is clearly

useful as well.

Age- restricted time banks in healthcare organizations have been difficult to sustain.

Moreover, social integration through ‘bridging’ ties with younger people are not possible

in the ‘seniors helping seniors’ type of programs. Given the potential benefits of having

diverse participants, open- membership time banks appear to be most advantageous.

When a greater variety of people is involved in creating solutions, what have been known

as problems affecting the elderly are more likely to be recognized as social issues pertinent

to all.

Despite the evidence surrounding time bank outcomes and the potential of the

concept, it is clear that these organizations are not easy to start or maintain. The concept

can be difficult to explain and some potential recruits are very skeptical. Once people do

join, many do not participate regularly in their time bank. Coordinators often struggle

to get more members to be more active. Funding for these programs is often problematic



as well. Those with paid coordinators often need to raise funds or justify the program to

the host agency regularly. Time banks run on pure volunteer labor risk burnout from the

core leaders, who invest a great deal of their time. Nonetheless, time banking is the most

innovative of the initiatives discussed here and probably has the greatest potential for the

elderly in need.

5. CONCLUSION

This chapter has focused on three instances of community- provided welfare. Microfinance,

cooperatives and time banks are collective, DIY tools that communities can engage in an

effort to ameliorate some of the social problems that our aging societies encounter. While

other chapters in this volume have discussed these at length, the issues that the elderly

currently face are projected to be compounded in the future. Limited incomes, inad-

equate healthcare, expensive housing, assistance with daily activities and social isolation

are just some of the many dilemmas increasingly experienced.

There is a variety of public policy issues surrounding the grassroots initiatives dis-

cussed here. Since these efforts increasingly reflect the shortcomings of our larger social

institutions, activists need to demand that governments support such initiatives and, at

the same time, better regulate the larger economy to help avoid these externalities. This

will not be easy, since it forms a challenge to the dominant model. The core of the neo-

liberal agenda is reliance on private markets and reduction of public services and benefits

(see Harvey 2005). With evidence of the positive outcomes of cooperatives and time

banks, activists and scholars should advocate for these alternatives and against neoliberal

practices that are the source of much of the inequality experienced today. The building

of grassroots alternatives needs to be integrated with other struggles concerning the

economy and beyond.

An irony is that localist movements may indirectly support the neoliberal agenda

and legitimize austerity programs by showing that citizens, rather than government,

can solve and be responsible for solving larger social problems themselves (Hess 2009).

Microfinance may be most susceptible to this. After all, microcredit does not challenge

any of the assumptions of neoliberalism and places the risk on the borrowers and their

families. Solely DIY efforts, which do not engage with elected officials and policy makers,

are more likely to contribute to this potential contradiction. Advocating for greater

taxes and regulations on large corporations and the wealthy, while modeling successful

community- based efforts, appears to be more strategic.

Cooperatives and time banks are reliant on supportive legislation to operate. They

are still hindered by some federal laws and would benefit from better legal environ-

ments. Funding, and in some cases governmental loans, would also be beneficial

and contribute to the sustainability of these alternatives. Policy makers need to be

persuaded to support these forms of economic democracy. Co- ops and time banks

empower participants by giving them a voice in the economy and providing potential to

increase their standard of living. Not only can they immediately serve the elderly now;

their expansion may help avoid some of the larger social problems associated with aging

in the future.



REFERENCES

Anthony, D. (2005), ‘Cooperation in microcredit borrowing groups: identity, sanctions, and reciprocity in the production of collective goods’, American Sociological Review, 70 (3): 496–515.

Bee, B. (2011), ‘Gender, solidarity and the paradox of microfinance: reflections from Bolivia’, Gender, Place and Culture, 18 (1): 23–43.

Besley, T. and S. Coate (1995), ‘Group lending, repayment incentives and social collateral’, Journal of Development Economics, 46: 1–18.

Brett, J.A. (2006), ‘“We sacrifice and eat less”: The structural complexities of microfinance participation’, Human Organization, 65 (1): 8–19.

Cahn, E.S. (2000), No More Throw- away People: The Co- production Imperative, Washington, DC: Essential Books.Collom, E., J.N. Lasker and C. Kyriacou (2012), Equal Time, Equal Value: Community Currencies and Time

Banking in the US, Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.Deller, S., A. Hoyt, B. Hueth and R. Sundaram- Stukel (2009), Research on the Economic Impact of Cooperatives,

Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Center for Cooperatives.Doucouliagos, C. (1995), ‘Worker participation and productivity in labor- managed and participatory capitalist

firms: a meta- analysis’, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 49 (1): 58–77.van Dulleman, C. (2011), ‘Micro pensions: an opportunity for MFIs’, paper presented at the 2011 Global

Microcredit Summit, Valladolid, Spain.Gill, L. (2000), Teetering on the Rim: Global Restructuring, Daily Life, and the Armed Retreat of the Bolivian

State, New York: Columbia University Press.Greenberg, E.S. (1980), ‘Participation in industrial decision making and work satisfaction: the case of producer

cooperatives’, Social Science Quarterly, 60 (4): 551–69.Greenberg, E.S. (1986), Workplace Democracy: The Political Effects of Participation, Ithaca, NY: Cornell

University Press.Gunn, C.E. (1984), Workers’ Self- management in the United States, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Harvey, D. (2005), A Brief History of Neoliberalism, New York: Oxford University Press.Hatch, J. (2011), ‘When clients grow old: the importance of age in addressing client needs’, paper presented at

the 2011 Global Microcredit Summit, Valladolid, Spain.Hess, D.J. (2009), Localist Movements in a Global Economy: Sustainability, Justice, and Urban Development in

the United States, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Hodson, R. (2001), Dignity at Work, New York: Cambridge University Press.International Co- operative Alliance (2014), ‘Co- operative identity, values & principles’, available online at

http://ica.coop/en/whats- co- op/cooperative- identity- values- principles.Johnson, S. (1998), ‘Microfinance North and South: contrasting current debates’, Journal of International

Development, 10: 799–809.Lindenfeld, F. (1996), ‘The cooperative commonwealth: an alternative to corporate capitalism and state

socialism’, Humanity & Society, 21 (1): 3–16.Majee, W. and A. Hoyt (2011), ‘Cooperatives and community development: a perspective on the use of coop-

eratives in development’, Journal of Community Practice, 19: 48–61.Meeker- Lowry, S. (1996), ‘Community money: the potential of local currency’. In J. Mander and E. Goldsmith

(eds), The Case Against the Global Economy, San Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Books, pp. 446–59.Miller, G.R. (2012), ‘“Gender trouble”: investigating gender and economic democracy in worker cooperatives

in the United States’, Review of Radical Political Economics, 44 (1): 8–22.National Cooperative Business Association (2012), ‘Types of cooperatives’, available online at http://usa2012.

coop/about- co- ops/types.North, P. (2006), Alternative Currency Movements as a Challenge to Globalisation? A Case Study of Manchester’s

Local Currency Networks, Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing.Ollman, B. (1998) Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists, New York: Routledge.de la Rocha, Z. (1999), ‘New Millennium Homes’, The Battle of Los Angeles by Rage Against the Machine,

Epic Records.Rothschild, J. (2009), ‘Workers’ cooperatives and social enterprise: a forgotten route to social equity and democ-

racy’, American Behavioral Scientist, 52 (7): 1023–41.Rothschild, J. and R. Russell (1986), ‘Alternatives to bureaucracy: democratic participation in the economy’,

Annual Review of Sociology, 12: 307–28.Russell, R. (1985), Sharing Ownership in the Workplace, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Russell, R. (1993), ‘Organizational theories of the labor- managed firm: arguments and evidence’, Research in

the Sociology of Organizations, 11: 1–32.Sanyal, P. (2009), ‘From credit to collective action: the role of microfinance in promoting women’s social capital

and normative influence’, American Sociological Review, 74 (4): 529–50.



Schecter, D. (1994), Radical Theories: Paths Beyond Marxism and Social Democracy, Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Schneiberg, M. (2011), ‘Toward an organizationally diverse American capitalism? Cooperative, mutual, and local, state- owned enterprise’, Seattle University Law Review, 34: 1409–34.

Seyfang, G. (2009), The New Economics of Sustainable Consumption: Seeds of Change, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Williams, C.C., T. Aldridge, R. Lee, A. Leyshon, N. Thrift and J. Tooke (2001), Bridges Into Work? An Evaluation of Local Exchange Trading Schemes (LETS), Bristol: The Policy Press.

Woolcock, M.J.V. (1998), ‘Social capital and economic development: toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework’, Theory and Society, 27: 151–208.

Woolcock, M.J.V. (1999), ‘Learning from failures in microfinance: what unsuccessful cases tell us about how group- based programmes work’, American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 58 (1): 17–42.


INTERNATIONAL HANDBOOK ON AGEING AND PUBLIC POLICY


HANDBOOKS OF RESEARCH ON PUBLIC POLICY

Frank Fischer, Rutgers University, New Jersey, USA

The objective of this series is to publish Handbooks that offer comprehensive overviews

of the very latest research within the key areas in the field of public policy. Under the

guidance of the Series Editor, Frank Fischer, the aim is to produce prestigious high

quality works of lasting significance. Each Handbook will consist of original, peer-

reviewed contributions by leading authorities, selected by an editor who is a recognized

leader in the field. The emphasis is on the most important concepts and research as well

as expanding debate and indicating the likely research agenda for the future. The

Handbooks will aim to give a comprehensive overview of the debates and research

positions in each key area of focus.


International Handbook on Ageing and Public Policy

Edited by

Sarah Harper and Kate Hamblin

Oxford Institute of Population Ageing, University of Oxford, UK

With Jaco Hoffman, Kenneth Howse and George Leeson

HANDBOOKS OF RESEARCH ON PUBLIC POLICY

Edward ElgarCheltenham, UK • Northampton, MA, USA


© Sarah Harper and Kate Hamblin 2014

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher.

Published byEdward Elgar Publishing LimitedThe Lypiatts15 Lansdown RoadCheltenhamGlos GL50 2JAUK

Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.William Pratt House9 Dewey CourtNorthamptonMassachusetts 01060USA

A catalogue record for this bookis available from the British Library

Library of Congress Control Number: 2014937093

This book is available electronically in the ElgarOnline.com Social and Political Science Subject Collection, E-ISBN 978 0 85793 391 1

ISBN 978 0 85793 390 4 (cased)

Typeset by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, CheshirePrinted and bound in Great Britain by T.J. International Ltd, Padstow


v

Contents

About the editors viii

List of contributors ix

1. Introduction: conceptualizing social policy for the twenty- first- century

demography 1

Sarah Harper

PARTS I–IV POLICY CHALLENGES

2. Introduction to Parts I–IV: perspectives on the challenges of population

ageing 13

Kenneth Howse

PART I POLICY CHALLENGES FOR MATURE SOCIETIES –

CONTEXT

3. Drivers of demographic change in the twentieth and twenty- first

centuries 23

George W. Leeson

4. A biodemographic perspective on longevity and ageing 36

Bruce A. Carnes

5. Migration and ageing societies 46

Sarah Harper

6. On the mechanical contributions of ageing to global income inequality 59

Parfait M. Eloundou- Enyegue

7. Population ageing and the size of the welfare state 74

Vincenzo Galasso and Paola Profeta

PART II POLICY CHALLENGES FOR MATURE SOCIETIES –

PENSIONS

8. Global pension systems 87

Robert Holzmann

9. The design and implementation of pension systems in developing

countries: issues and options 108

David E. Bloom and Roddy McKinnon


vi International handbook on ageing and public policy

10. Understanding pension wealth 131

Zhenyu Li and Anthony Webb

11. Rational pension reform 140

Axel Börsch- Supan

12. National Transfer Accounts and intergenerational transfers 153

Ron Lee and Andy Mason

PART III POLICY CHALLENGES FOR MATURE SOCIETIES –

HEALTH

13. Assessing the cost- effectiveness of therapies for older people 167

Richard Edlin

14. Population ageing and health care expenditure growth 178

Ed Westerhout

15. Developing appropriate and effective care for people with chronic

disease 191

Bert Vrijhoef and Arianne Elissen

PART IV POLICY CHALLENGES FOR MATURE SOCIETIES –

WELFARE

16. Sustainability and intergenerational justice in age- related transfers 205

Kenneth Howse

17. Health and social protection policies for older people in Latin America 217

Peter Lloyd- Sherlock

18. Aging electorates and gerontocracy: the politics of aging in a global

world 227

Fernando M. Torres- Gil and Kimberly Spencer- Suarez

19. Working beyond retirement age: lessons for policy 242

David Lain and Sarah Vickerstaff

20. Families, older persons and care in contexts of poverty: the case of

South Africa 256

Jaco Hoffman

PARTS V AND VI PRACTITIONER PERSPECTIVES

21. Introduction to Parts V and VI: policy and practitioner responses to

the challenges of population ageing 273

Jaco Hoffman


Contents vii

PART V PRACTITIONER PERSPECTIVES – CASE STUDIES

22. Sustaining the Nordic welfare model in the face of population ageing 279

Virpi Timonen and Mikko Kautto

23. Kinship solidarity in Southern Europe 289

Chiara Saraceno

24. Ageing and social policy in Australia 301

Jeni Warburton

25. The pension system in China: an overview 318

Taichang Chen

26. How technology is reshaping the processes of providing health care for

ageing populations 328

Robin Gauld

27. Ageing and caregiving in America: the immigrant workforce 342

B. Lindsay Lowell

28. Canada’s Live- in Caregiver Program 355

Ivy Lynn Bourgeault and Jelena Atanackovic

PART VI PRACTITIONER PERSPECTIVES – POLICY

INNOVATION AND CIVIL SOCIETY

29. Intergenerational programs and policies in aging societies 367

Matthew Kaplan and Mariano Sánchez

30. Population ageing and private sector provision: the case of dependent

older women in Latin America 384

Nélida Redondo

31. Demographic change and the role of older people in the voluntary

sector 398

Karsten Hank and Marcel Erlinghagen

32. The third sector as a provider of services for older people 410

Ewa Leś

33. State–third sector partnership frameworks: from administration to

participation? 421

Ingo Bode

34. Microfinance, cooperatives and time banks: community- provided

welfare 433

Ed Collom

35. Faith- based organizations and the provision of care for older people 445

Lori Carter- Edwards, James H. Johnson Jr, Allan M. Parnell and

Harold G. Koenig


viii International handbook on ageing and public policy

36. Lifelong learning and employers: reskilling older workers 463

John Field and Roy Canning

37. Retirement planning and financial literacy 474

Annamaria Lusardi

Index 491


ix

About the editors

Sarah Harper is Director of the Oxford Institute of Population Ageing at the University

of Oxford and Senior Research Fellow at Nuffield College. Her current research concerns

globalization and global population ageing. In particular she considers the impact at the

global, societal and individual level of the age- structural shift from predominantly young

to predominantly older societies, addressing such questions as the implications of the

widespread falls in fertility and growth in extreme longevity on labour markets and social

structures. Sarah is the author of Ageing Societies: Myths, Challenges and Opportunities

(Hodder Arnold, 2006), Population Challenges: growth, decline and migration (Oxford

University Press, 2014) and Population and the Environment (Cambridge University

Press, forthcoming). Sarah also co- edits the Journal of Population Ageing, published by

Springer.

Kate Hamblin received her PhD from the University of Bath in 2010. Her thesis

addressed the changes to policies for work and retirement transitions for those over 50 in

EU15 nations over the period 1995–2005, with a particular focus on the uneven impact

of these reforms on different sub- groups within this age category. She has worked on the

‘Carers@Work. Combining Job and Care – Conflict or Opportunity’ project, funded by

the Volkswagen Foundation. This project sought to address the experience of combin-

ing paid work with looking after an older person in terms of the difficulties faced and

the strategies used to create a balance. Kate currently works on the AKTIVE project

(Advancing Knowledge of Telecare for Independence and Vitality in later life). The

AKTIVE project explores the potential of telecare to: improve the quality of life of older

individuals with dementia or susceptibility to falls and sustain their independence; enable

family caregivers to continue their care and support of older family members alongside

work and other roles; and enhance and modernize social care/support in a cost- effective

way.


x

Contributors

Jelena Atanackovic is a PhD candidate at the Department of Sociology, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada. Her research interests lie in the area of immigration and integration as well as health policy and healthcare delivery. During her graduate career, Jelena has been involved in many research projects focusing mainly on internation-ally educated healthcare professionals in Canada. Her dissertation research focuses on experiences of foreign live- in caregivers in Ontario. She is currently working on a project that aims to identify and change systemic barriers preventing access to quality language education for internationally educated nurses in the bridging program at York University.

David E. Bloom is Clarence James Gamble Professor of Economics and Demography at Harvard University, and faculty director of Harvard University’s Program on the Global Demography of Aging. He is a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Bloom received a BS in industrial and labor relations from Cornell University in 1976, an MA in econom-ics from Princeton University in 1978, and a PhD in economics and demography from Princeton University in 1981.

Ingo Bode holds a chair in Social Policy, Organization and Society at the Department of Social Work and Social Services in the Faculty of Human Sciences of the University of Kassel, Germany. He filled academic positions in Canada, the UK and France before coming to Kassel. His areas of work embrace studies in comparative social policy and organizations in the social and healthcare sector. Currently, he is a grant holder of the Germany Research Council (DFG) and member of the management committee of the European COST action ‘SO.S Cohesion. Social services, welfare state and places’. His latest publications include: ‘Processing institutional change in public service provision. The case of the German hospital sector’, Public Organization Review, 13 (3), 323–39, 2013; ‘In futile search of excellence. The “muddling through agenda” of service- providing “social enterprises” in contemporary Europe’, in Simon Denny and Fred Seddon (eds), Social Enterprise: Accountability and Evaluation around the World (London: Routledge, 2013, pp. 196–212; (with B. Champetier) ‘À la croisée des chemins? Analyser l’évolution des systèmes de care aux aînés par une méthode ouverte de comparaison’, Sociologie, 3 (3), 2012, 283–98.

Axel Börsch- Supan, PhD, studied Economics and Mathematics in Munich and Bonn. He holds a PhD degree from MIT (advisor: Daniel McFadden) and was Assistant Professor of Public Policy at the JFK School of Government at Harvard University. After two years as Professor of Economics at Dortmund University he became Professor of Macroeconomics and Economic Policy at the University of Mannheim in 1989. Since 2001 he has been the founding and executive director of the Mannheim Research Institute for the Economics of Aging (MEA). In January 2011, Börsch- Supan joined the Max Planck Society. Since July 2011, he has been the director of the Max Planck Institute, which is dedicated to Social Law and Social Policy. He is also the director of


Contributors xi

the Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA), dedicated to the field of social policy.

Ivy Lynn Bourgeault, PhD, is a professor in the Institute of Population Health at the University of Ottawa and holds the Canadian Institute of Health Research Chair in Health Human Resource Policy, jointly funded by Health Canada. She is also the scien-tific director of the pan- Ontario Population Health Improvement Research Network, the Ontario Health Human Resource Research Network and the pan- Canadian Health Human Resources Network. She has garnered an international reputation for her research on health professions, health policy and women’s health.

Roy Canning is a senior lecturer in the School of Education, University of Stirling, UK. His research interests are primarily in vocational education in the upper secondary school and international comparative studies in vocational education and training. This covers both work- related learning and work- based learning, particularly in the areas of older workers, apprenticeships and college- based learning. Current research projects include a European comparative study for Cedefop on initial vocational education and training (IVET) in Europe and a preliminary study of the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) of European teachers of vocational education.

Bruce A. Carnes is a professor in the College of Medicine at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center and an adjunct professor of zoology at the University of Oklahoma. His research has focused on the biodemography of aging, identifying quan-titative characteristics of mortality, developing a methodology for comparing mortality schedules between species and estimating probabilistic limits (warranty periods) for the duration of life of individuals and the life expectancy of populations.

Lori Carter- Edwards is deputy director for Research and Operations at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is an active member of the National Institutes of Health Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) Community Engagement Key Function Committee and a contributor to the evaluation component of the National Health Disparities Plan. Her primary research interest is in social epidemiology and community interventions addressing health disparities, with a specific emphasis on indi-vidual, social and environmental correlates of obesity in black communities, including faith- based populations.

Taichang Chen (MPhil (Oxon); DPhil (Oxon)) is Assistant Professor at the School of Public Administration and Policy, Renmin University of China, Beijing. Taichang origi-nally trained as an economist and his early research focused on labour market segmenta-tion and the social implications of rural to urban migration in China. Later, he trained as a sociologist and his current research concerns the socioeconomic aspects of population ageing in China. In particular he considers the impact at societal and individual level of the age- structural shift from predominantly young to predominantly older societies, on the well- being of older people in China.

Ed Collom (PhD, University of California, Riverside, 2001) is Professor of Sociology at the University of Southern Maine. His research surrounds the study of alternative social forms: local currency, home schooling and workplace democracy. He is lead author of Equal Time, Equal Value (Ashgate, 2012), an investigation of time banking in the USA.


xii International handbook on ageing and public policy

Other publications appear in Work and Occupations, Sociological Forum, Journal of Aging

& Social Policy, and elsewhere. He is considered a leading expert in local currencies and has been widely interviewed and quoted in popular media such as NBC Nightly News,

Time Magazine, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune and National Public Radio.

Richard Edlin is a senior lecturer at the University of Auckland, having previously held posts at the Universities of Leeds and Sheffield (UK). A health economist, much of his research involves cost- effectiveness analyses; these aim to inform decision makers by identifying which healthcare interventions are likely to improve population health once their effects on the funding of other treatments are assessed. Richard’s prior research includes an assessment for the UK Department of Health as to whether cost- effectiveness analysis is implicitly ageist in nature.

Arianne Elissen is a research fellow at the CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, The Netherlands. Since 2007, she has participated in several (inter)national research projects on the design, implementation and evaluation of innova-tive care models for patients with chronic conditions. Arianne has (co- )authored papers in journals including the American Journal of Managed Care, Health Services Research and Health Economics, Policy and Law. She holds a MSc in Health Policy, Economics and Management and a PhD in Health Services Research, both from Maastricht University.

Parfait M. Eloundou- Enyegue is currently a faculty member of the Department of Development Sociology (Cornell University) and a graduate of the Pennsylvania State University. His current research focuses on global inequality, demographic dividends, and schooling in sub- Saharan Africa. In addition to his teaching program in the USA, Asia and Africa, he is involved in a large program of outreach about demographic dividends in francophone Africa.

Marcel Erlinghagen is a professor of sociology at the University of Duisburg- Essen, Germany. He also is a research professor at the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW), Berlin. His research focuses on the sociology of labour markets and on volunteer-ing. His research was published in Ageing & Society, the European Sociological Review, and the Journal of Social Policy, among others.

John Field is a professor in the School of Education, University of Stirling, UK. He has written a number of books and papers on social, economic and historical aspects of lifelong learning in the UK and Ireland. He has also written on social capital. His most recent book is Working Men’s Bodies: Work camps in Britain, 1880–1939 (Manchester University Press, 2013). He has been involved in policy advice in Britain and Europe, most recently as part of the UK Government Office for Science’s Foresight project on mental capital and well- being.

Vincenzo Galasso is Professor of Economics at Università della Svizzera Italiana and Director of the Center for Economic and Political Research on Aging (CEPRA), Lugano, Switzerland; Research Fellow at IGIER, Bocconi University, Milan; Research Fellow at CEPR, London, and at CESIfo, Munich. His research deals with political economics, aging, social security and the welfare state. He has widely published in top academic journals in economics and political science. In 2006, he published The Political


Contributors xiii

Future of Social Security in Aging Societies (The MIT Press, 2006). He received a PhD in Economics from the University of California at Los Angeles.

Robin Gauld is Professor of Health Policy and Director of the Centre for Health Systems in the Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. He is a senior fellow at the Boston University Health Policy Institute, and was a Commonwealth Fund Harkness Fellow in 2008–09, working with colleagues from Boston University and Harvard University. Current research interests include comparative health policy, health system and quality improvement, care coordination, clinical governance, primary care, population- based health funding formulas, and health information technology. He has authored over 80 peer- reviewed journal articles and several books, including The New Health Policy (Open University Press, 2009), which was awarded First Prize in the Health and Social Care category at the 2010 British Medical Association Medical Book Awards. Other recent books include The Age of Supported

Independence, co- authored with Beatrice Hale and Patrick Barrett (Springer, 2010), Health Care Systems in Asia and Europe, co- edited with Christian Aspalter and Uchida Yasuo (Routledge, 2011) and the forthcoming Democratic Governance in Health, co- authored with Miriam Laugesen (Otago University Press, 2012).

Karsten Hank is a professor of sociology at the University of Cologne, Germany. He also is a research professor at the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW), Berlin, and member of the working group on ‘Social Networks’ for the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). His research focuses on active and healthy ageing as well as on intergenerational relations in cross- nationally comparative perspec-tive. His research has been published in the European Sociological Review, the Journal

of Gerontology: Social Sciences and the Journal of Marriage and Family, among others.

Jaco Hoffman joined the Oxford Institute of Population Ageing (OIPA), University of Oxford in October 2006 and is currently a senior research fellow, developing the Institute’s focus on ageing in Africa through the conduct of research and the coordination of the African Research on Ageing Network (AFRAN). AFRAN is a United Nations endorsed programme at the OIPA. This collaborative network brings together African and inter-national institutions and individuals from academia, policy and practice to develop and expand African research and training capacity on ageing. Jaco’s research interests revolve around intergenerational issues in Africa in general and in particular the configuration and reconfiguration of these relationships in the context of poverty and HIV/AIDS. Furthermore, he is Senior Researcher at the Africa Unit for Transdisciplinary Health Research, North- West University, South Africa and a fellow of the Institute on Ageing in Africa, University of Cape Town, South Africa. As past president of the South African Gerontological Association, he continues to be involved in various developmental pro-grammes and initiatives in the field of ageing in South Africa.

Robert Holzmann is Professor of Economics, now holding the chair of Old Age Financial Protection at the University of Malaya, and is Research Fellow of IZA and CESifo. He was Sector Director of the Social Protection & Labor Department, leading, inter alia, the strategic and conceptual work on pensions and labor at the World Bank. Previously he was Professor of Economics at the University of Saarland (Germany), University of Vienna (Austria), and Senior Economist at IMF and OECD. His research and


xiv International handbook on ageing and public policy

operational involvement extends to all regions of the world, and he has published 32 books and over 150 articles on social, fiscal and financial policy issues.

Kenneth Howse is a senior research fellow at the Oxford Institute of Population Ageing. He has a background in philosophy and worked for several years as a bioethicist with the Institute of Medical Ethics. He first became interested in population ageing in the 1990s when he joined the Centre for Policy on Ageing, a London- based think- tank, as a policy researcher. At CPA he undertook research on religion and ageing, and also on older pris-oners. In 2003 he moved to the Oxford Institute of Ageing, and now has a broad interest in the policy implications of demographic ageing in both the developing and the devel-oped world. Since joining the Institute he has worked on problems of intergenerational fairness and the ethical issues surrounding ageing, the determinants – and implications – of mortality decline, and the health policy challenges of population ageing.

James H. Johnson, Jr is the William Rand Kenan, Jr Distinguished Professor of Entrepreneurship and Strategy in the Kenan- Flagler Business School and Director of the Urban Investment Strategies Center in the Frank Hawkins Kenan Institute of Private Enterprise at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. His primary research interest lies in the area of post- 1990 demographic changes in the USA, with particular emphasis on the societal implications and impacts of population aging.

Matthew Kaplan, PhD, is Professor of Intergenerational Programs and Aging in the Department of Agricultural Economics, Sociology, and Education at the Pennsylvania State University. In this position, he conducts research, develops curricular resources, and provides statewide leadership in the development and evaluation of intergenera-tional programs. Dr Kaplan’s work focuses on intergenerational programs and practices from an interdisciplinary and cross- cultural perspective. He has published several books, including two that explore the international dimension of intergenerational work and one on intergenerational strategies for promoting community participation. He has a PhD in Environmental Psychology from the City University of New York Graduate Center.

Mikko Kautto works as Head of Research Department at the Centre for Pensions in Finland. He is also Adjunct Professor at the Department of Social Policy at the University of Helsinki. His focus of research is careers and retirement, the sustainability of pension financing and the adequacy of pension provision. He is the editor of Nordic Social Policy (Routledge, 1991) and Nordic Welfare States in the European Context (Routledge, 2001). He has done research in the areas of comparative welfare research, social policy and welfare reform, and also published research on (economic) welfare.

Harold G. Koenig studied at Stanford University; the medical school at the University of California, San Francisco; and followed courses in geriatric medicine, psychiatry and biostatistics training at Duke University. He is on the Duke faculty as Professor of Psychiatry and Associate Professor of Medicine, and on King Abdulaziz University faculty (Jeddah, Saudi Arabia) as Distinguished Adjunct Professor. Harold directs the Center for Spirituality, Theology and Health at Duke University. He has nearly 400 sci-entific peer- reviewed articles and book chapters and 40 books in print or preparation. He has given invited testimony to both the US Senate and the US House of Representatives, and in 2012 received the Oskar Pfister Award from the American Psychiatric Association.


Contributors xv

David Lain is a Leverhulme Early Career Research Fellow at the University of Brighton Business School, UK. His current research explores changes to work and retirement in the USA and the UK. He has published on the employment of people aged 65 and over in the USA and the UK in the Journal of Social Policy, Work Employment and Society and the book collection Work, Health and Welbeing (edited by Sarah Vickerstaff, Chris Phillipson and Ross Wilkie, The Policy Press, 2001).

Ron Lee is Professor of Demography and Jordan Family Professor of Economics at the University of California at Berkeley, where he also Directs the Center for the Economics and Demography of Aging. Before moving to Berkeley in 1979, he taught at the University of Michigan for eight years. He is an elected member of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Philosophical Society and a Corresponding Member of the British Academy. He co- directs the National Transfer Accounts project. Other research interests include probabilistic forecasting and evolu-tionary theories of aging.

George W. Leeson is Co- Director of the Oxford Institute of Population Ageing at the University of Oxford and a senior research fellow in Demography at the University of Oxford. He is also Senior Research Fellow at Kellogg College, Oxford, as well as being a member of the Oxford Martin School. Dr Leeson’s main research interests are in the socioeconomic–demographic aspects of ageing populations, covering both demographic modelling of population development and the analysis of national and international data sets. Dr Leeson is responsible for the Global Ageing Survey carried out in three waves in more than 20 countries in Europe, North and South America and Asia, and including approximately 45 000 people aged 40–79 years. His other research includes the inequali-ties of global ageing, and the demography of Europe and Latin America. Dr Leeson is currently in receipt of a British Academy International Partnership and Mobility Award working with colleagues at the University of Guanajuato- Leon in Mexico in social demography, and as a demographic expert he is a member of the European Commission’s team to develop a strategy for DG SANCO’s policy and legislative framework to deliver on EU food safety and nutrition to 2050.

Ewa Leś is a professor of Political Science and Social Welfare at Warsaw University in Poland. She is also the founder and chair of the Research Center on Non- Profit Organizations at the Polish Academy of Sciences, as well as chair of the Centre for Development of Civil Society at the Institute of Social Policy at Warsaw University. Ewa has masters and PhD degrees in Political Science and Social Policy from Warsaw University. She has worked as project leader on several national and international research projects, including prin-cipal local associate for Poland under the Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project. Most recently she has completed a large project for the European Union, carrying out Poland’s first comprehensive survey of the social economy sector. Her most recent books include The Voluntary Sector in Post- Communist East- Central Europe, Voluntary

Organizations: A Comparative Study. From Philanthropy to Subsidiarity. She edited a book called Pictures of Social Economy (Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, Warsaw, 2008) and co- edited, with Stefania Bernini, Family Transformations in Poland and Italy and their

Implications for Family Policy (Warsaw University Press, 2010).


xvi International handbook on ageing and public policy

Zhenyu Li joined the Center for Retirement Research (CRR) at Boston College in October 2011. She earned her BA degree in Mathematics from the University of Science and Technology of China and received her PhD in Mathematics from Indiana University–Bloomington. Since joining the CRR, Zhenyu has applied her mathematical modeling skills to constructing actuarial models of public sector pension plans and sto-chastic dynamic programming models of optimal household consumption and portfolio allocation.

B. Lindsay Lowell is Director of Policy Studies at the Institute for the Study of International Migration, Georgetown University. He was previously Director of Research at the Congressionally appointed Commission on Immigration Reform. He has been Research Director of the Pew Hispanic Center, an analyst at the Department of Labor; and he taught at Princeton and the University of Texas. Dr Lowell has written over 150 articles and reports in journals such as Demography, American Economic Review,

Industrial Relations and Work and Occupations. His interests include immigration policy, labor force, development and mobility of the highly skilled. He is a demographer with a PhD from Brown University.

Peter Lloyd- Sherlock is Professor of Social Policy and International Development at the School of International Development, University of East Anglia, UK. His main research interest is policy for older people in low- and middle- income countries, including pen-sions, health and long- term care. Recent publications include Population Ageing and

International Development: From Generalisation to Evidence (Policy Press, Bristol, 2010).

Annamaria Lusardi is the Denit Trust Distinguished Scholar and Professor of Economics and Accountancy at the George Washington School of Business and Academic Director of the Global Financial Literacy Excellence Center. Previously, she was the Joel Z. and Susan Hyatt Professor of Economics at Dartmouth College. She has also taught at Princeton University, the University of Chicago Public Policy School, the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and Columbia Business School. In 2008 she was a visiting scholar at Harvard Business School. She is the recipient of the William E. Odom Visionary Leadership Award from the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy, and the National Numeracy Network’s inaugural 2012 Steen Award.

Andy Mason is Professor of Economics, University of Hawaii at Manoa and Senior Fellow at the East–West Center, Honolulu, Hawaii. He is a member of the Center for the Economics and Demography of Aging (CEDA) at the University of California, Berkeley. He co- directs the National Transfer Accounts (www.ntaccounts.org) network, an inter-national project involving researchers from more than 35 countries developing a compre-hensive approach to measuring and studying the changes in population age structure and the generational economy in both rich and poor countries. His current research is con-cerned with the economic life cycle, intergenerational issues, and the effects of population change on development, economic growth, and public and private transfer systems.

Roddy McKinnon is Editor and Publication Manager with the International Social Security Association (ISSA), Geneva, Switzerland. He is managing editor of the quar-terly journal International Social Security Review, published by Wiley Blackwell in English, French, Spanish and German.


Contributors xvii

Allan M. Parnell is a demographer and Vice President of the Cedar Grove Institute for Sustainable Communities, a not- for- profit research organization located outside Mebane, North Carolina. He received his AB with Honors in Geography, and his MA and PhD in Sociology, all from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Prior to his current position, he was a visiting research associate at the East–West Center in Honolulu, Research Associate for the Committee on Population at the National Academy of Sciences, and member of Duke University’s sociology faculty. He has been the principal investigator on grants from the National Institutes of Health, including the National Institute on Aging.

Paola Profeta is Associate Professor of Public Economics at Bocconi University, Research Fellow of Dondena and Econpubblica and Research Affiliate of CESifo. Her research interests are in the field of public economics, in particular social security, political economy, gender economics and comparative tax systems. She has published in international journals, among which are European Economic Review, Economic

Journal, Oxford Economic Papers, Economic Policy, Journal of Public Economic Theory,

International Tax and Public Finance, European Journal of Political Economy and Public

Choice. She regularly writes in the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore.

Nélida Redondo is a research sociologist and professor at the University ISALUD and is also a specialized adviser on ageing of the population and on Argentina’s elderly popu-lation’s living conditions at the National Institute of Statistics and Censuses (INDEC). She holds a BA in Sociology from the University of Buenos Aires (1972) and an MA in Sociology from de Latino America Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO) (1990). She earned her doctorate ‘summa cum laude’ in Social Sciences from the University of Buenos Aires in 2006. Dra Redondo is author of articles, books and chapters in international handbooks related to the field of sociology of ageing and population ageing.

Mariano Sánchez, Professor of Sociology at the University of Granada in Spain and Visiting Scholar in the Department of Agricultural Economics, Sociology and Education at the Pennsylvania State University (2012–13), has been Technical Coordinator of the Spanish Social Network of Experiences with Intergenerational Relations in the period 2005–12, former co- editor of the Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, and member of the Management Committee of the International Consortium for Intergenerational Programmes. He has co- authored chapters on intergenerational relationships in two recent White Papers on active ageing published in Spain. Professor Sánchez co- directs the online course Qualification of Intergenerational Work Professionals.

Chiara Saraceno was Professor of Sociology at the University of Turin until 2006, when she was appointed Research Professor at the Wissenshaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung. Retired, she now lives in Turin, where she is honorary fellow at the Collegio Carlo Alberto. Her research topics concern comparative family, gender and intergenerational arrangements, comparative welfare regimes, social inequalities and poverty. Among her recent publications are ‘Towards an integrated approach for the analysis of gender equity in policies supporting paid work and care responsibilities’ (with W. Keck), Demographic Research, 25 (11), 2011; ‘Social inequalities in facing old- age dependency: a bi- generational perspective’, Journal of European Social Policy, 20 (1), 2010; ‘Can we identify intergenerational policy regimes in Europe?’ (with W. Keck),


xviii International handbook on ageing and public policy

European Societies, 12 (5), 2010; and, as editor, Families, Ageing and Social Policies (Edward Elgar, 2008).

Kimberly Spencer- Suarez is a graduate student at Columbia University pursuing research at the intersection of social work practice and administration, gerontology and socio- legal justice. Before commencing doctoral studies, she acquired practice experience in community organizations serving disadvantaged populations as well as in community- based and inpatient hospice care. A California native, Ms Spencer- Suarez earned her BA in History (2008) and MSW (2012) from the University of California, Los Angeles.

Virpi Timonen is Associate Professor of Social Policy and Ageing at Trinity College Dublin, Ireland. She has published over 50 articles and chapters on social gerontology and welfare- state responses to population ageing in Ageing & Society, Journal of Aging

Studies, Journal of Family Issues, Research on Aging, Journal of Social Policy and other leading international journals and books. Virpi Timonen has written five books, includ-ing Ageing Societies: A Comparative Introduction (Open University Press, 2008). She is a co- investigator in the Irish Longitudinal Study of Ageing, TILDA.

Fernando M. Torres- Gil’s multifaceted career spans the academic, professional and policy arenas. He is a professor of Social Welfare and Public Policy at UCLA, an adjunct pro-fessor of Gerontology at USC, and director of the UCLA Center for Policy Research on Aging. He has served as Associate Dean and Acting Dean at the UCLA School of Public Affairs, and most recently Chair of the Social Welfare Department. He has written six books and over l00 publications, including The New Aging: Politics and

Change in America (Auburn House, 1992) and Lessons from Three Nations, Volumes I

and II (Baywood Publishing, 2007). His academic contributions have earned him mem-bership in the prestigious Academies of Public Administration, Gerontology and Social Insurance. His research spans important topics of health and long- term care, disability, entitlement reform and the politics of aging. In 20l0 he received his third presidential appointment (with Senate confirmation) when President Barack Obama appointed him Vice Chair of the National Council on Disability, an independent federal agency that reports to the Congress and the White House on federal matters related to disability policy.

Sarah Vickerstaff is Professor of Work and Employment, University of Kent, UK. Her research focuses on paid work and the life course, especially at the beginning and end of working life. Recent publications include Work, Health and Well- being: The

Challenges of Managing Health at Work (eds S. Vickerstaff, C. Phillipson and R. Wilkie, Policy Press, 2012) and Encouraging Labour Market Activity among 60–64 Year Olds (eds S. Vickerstaff, W. Lorretto, J. Billings, P. Brown, L. Mitton, T. Parkin and P. White, Department for Work and Pensions, Research Report No. 531, 2008).

Bert Vrijhoef is Professor of Health Systems and Policy at the National University of Singapore and Professor of Chronic Care at the Scientific Centre for Care and Welfare, Tilburg University, The Netherlands. He is principal investigator of studies on chronic care management, telemonitoring, advanced nursing and redesigning healthcare delivery in the Netherlands, other European countries and Singapore. He has written over 150 scientific publications and was awarded the International Harkness Fellowship by the


Contributors xix

Commonwealth Fund in 2008. He holds an MSc in Health Policy & Management from the Erasmus University Rotterdam and a PhD in Medical Sociology from Maastricht University.

Jeni Warburton is the John Richards Chair in Rural Aged Care Research at La Trobe University in Wodonga, Victoria, Australia. Jeni has 20 years’ experience of research into social policy, particularly relating to issues associated with an ageing population. Her main areas of expertise are in healthy and productive ageing; as well as volunteering and community, with her current research focusing on ageing in rural communities.

Anthony Webb is a research economist at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. He earned his doctorate in economics from the University of California, San Diego, in 2001. He holds a BA in industrial economics from the University of Nottingham, UK (1975) and an MA in economics from the University of Manchester, UK (1994). Before beginning his doctorate, Dr Webb was employed by the British gov-ernment, providing policy advice on taxation of personal savings. His published work includes investigations of the impact of pension type on the age of retirement and a number of studies of retirement asset decumulation.

Ed Westerhout is affiliated with the University of Amsterdam, Department of Macro and International Economics, as a researcher and teacher of the Macroeconomics course and the Public Finance and Fiscal Policy course. He is also affiliated with CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, as a researcher in the field of pensions. He is a research fellow at Netspar. Also, he regularly publishes blogs on his website http://edwest-erhout.nl. Previously, he has been affiliated with the research department of the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the University of Amsterdam, where he then has been teaching economic growth, monetary and fiscal policies. At CPB, he has been leader of projects on ageing, pension reform and the healthcare sector. Ed Westerhout has published in leading academic journals such as Economica, Health Economics and International Tax

and Public Finance.


34. microfinance, cooperatives and time banks: …people.usm.maine.edu/collom/ihapp.pdfmicrofinance,...

Documents