The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Internal Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western, Perth, WA 6009, Australia.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 27;17(21):7868. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17217868.
We explore the intergenerational pattern of resource transfer and possible associated factors. A scoping review was conducted of quantitative, peer-reviewed, English-language studies related to intergenerational transfer or interaction. We searched AgeLine, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, and Sociological Abstracts for articles published between Jane 2008 and December 2018. Seventy-five studies from 25 countries met the inclusion criteria. The scoping review categorised resource transfers into three types: financial, instrumental, and emotional support. Using an intergenerational solidarity framework, factors associated with intergenerational transfer were placed in four categories: (1) demographic factors (e.g., age, gender, marital status, education, and ethno-cultural background); (2) needs and opportunities factors, including health, financial resources, and employment status; (3) family structures, namely, family composition, family relationship, and earlier family events; and (4) cultural-contextual structures, including state policies and social norms. Those factors were connected to the direction of resource transfer between generations. Downward transfers from senior to junior generations occur more frequently than upward transfers in many developed countries. Women dominate instrumental transfers, perhaps influenced by traditional gender roles. Overall, the pattern of resource transfer between generations is shown, and the impact of social norms and social policy on intergenerational transfers is highlighted. Policymakers should recognise the complicated interplay of each factor with different cultural contexts. The findings could inform policies that strengthen intergenerational solidarity and support.
我们探讨了代际资源转移的模式以及可能存在的相关因素。我们对 2008 年 1 月至 2018 年 12 月期间发表的定量、同行评审的英文文献进行了范围综述,这些文献涉及代际转移或代际互动。我们在 AgeLine、PsycINFO、Social Work Abstracts 和 Sociological Abstracts 中搜索了相关文章。共有来自 25 个国家的 75 项研究符合纳入标准。该范围综述将资源转移分为三种类型:经济、工具和情感支持。使用代际团结框架,将与代际转移相关的因素分为四类:(1)人口统计学因素(例如年龄、性别、婚姻状况、教育和种族文化背景);(2)需求和机会因素,包括健康、经济资源和就业状况;(3)家庭结构,包括家庭组成、家庭关系和早期家庭事件;(4)文化-背景结构,包括国家政策和社会规范。这些因素与代际间资源转移的方向有关。在许多发达国家,从老年到年轻一代的向下转移比向上转移更为常见。女性在工具性转移中占据主导地位,这可能受到传统性别角色的影响。总的来说,展示了代际间资源转移的模式,并强调了社会规范和社会政策对代际转移的影响。政策制定者应认识到每个因素与不同文化背景之间复杂的相互作用。研究结果可以为加强代际团结和支持的政策提供信息。