Heterogeneity in Long-Term Care for Older Adults in Europe: Between Individual and Systemic Effects

The current paper uses comparable data to present an overview of home-based long-term care (LTC) for persons over 65 years of age in Europe. It aims to provide new insights to aid discussions on LTC policy convergence in three areas: the need for services, the extent to which these needs are met and the means employed to do so. It uses data from wave 6 (2015) of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). Four summary indicators are charted: (i) the care need: how many people need care; (ii) the care gap: the extent to which stated needs remain unmet; (iii) the care mix: how overall provision is divided into formal, informal or a mix of both; and (iv) care satisfaction based on stated preferences by recipients. Heterogeneity at individual level is explained by probit analyses, examining how individual factors (age, severity of need, gender, social networks, prosperity and others) combine with country group and country effects. Scatter plots are used to relate differences among countries to systemic variables, such as public expenditures. The key conclusions are that: (i) Once needs are defined in comparable terms, there remains a surprisingly large number of people across Europe whose needs are not addressed at all, what we call the care gap, especially among the younger group aged 65–80; this is evident everywhere and is not limited to any one type of system or group of countries; (ii) formal and informal care are both significant for the stability of an LTC provision system and for the well-being of care recipients; and (iii) recipients of care are especially sceptical about formal care, as they reward principally informal carers with whom they have personal relationships. The overwhelming finding is that the heterogeneity defies easy generalisations, whether these relate to individual characteristics or systemic effects. This (unexplained) heterogeneity is a challenge for researchers to explain, but it could also represent an untapped resource for policymakers to exploit. View Full-Text