Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Precarity and aging: A scoping review
Amanda Grenier a,b, c, d, Stephanie Hatzifilalithisc,d, Debbie Laliberte-Rudmane, Karen Kobayashif, Patrik Marierg, h, Chris Phillipsoni
aFactor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, Canada bBaycrest Hopsital, Toronto, Ontario
cHealth, Aging and Society, McMaster University, Hamilton, CanadadGilbrea Centre for Studies in Aging, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
eSchool of Occupational Therapy, University of Western Ontario, London, CanadafInstitute on Aging and Lifelong Health, University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada
gDepartment of Political Science, Concordia University, Montreal, CanadahCentre de recherche et d’expertise en gérontologie sociale, Integrated Health and Social
Services University Network for West-Central Montreal i Manchester Institute for Collaborative Research on Ageing (MICRA), University of
Manchester, Manchester, England, United Kingdom
Email Addresses:
Amanda Grenier: [email protected] Hatzifilalithis: [email protected] Laliberte-Rudman: [email protected] Kobayashi: [email protected] Marier: [email protected] Chris Phillipson: [email protected]
Corresponding Author: Amanda GrenierE-mail address: [email protected]
2
Funding
This work was supported by an Insight grant of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (435-2016-0933) (SSHRC). The funder played no role in the design, execution, analysis/ interpretation of data, or writing of the study.
3
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the research assistants and Equity Burke for their important
contributions to this project.
4
Precarity and aging: A scoping review
Abstract
Background and Objective: The concept of precarity holds the potential to understand insecurities and risks experienced by older people in the contemporary social, economic and cultural context. This study maps existing conceptualizations of precarity in relation to aging and later life, identifies key themes, and considers the use of precarity in two sub-fields.
Research Design and Methods: This paper presents the findings of a two-phase scoping study of the international literature on precarity in later life. Phase I involved a review of definitions and understandings of precarity and aging. Phase II explored two emerging sub-themes of disability and im/migration as related to aging and late life.
Results: A total of 121 published studies were reviewed across Phase I and Phase II. Findings reveal the definitions and emergent themes on precarious aging and highlight how precarity has been used in two identified sub-fields of study. Findings reveal that the definition of precarity is connected with insecurity, vulnerability and labour, and that particular social locations, trajectories or conditions may heighten the risk of precarity in late life.
Implications and Discussion : The article concludes by outlining the need for conceptual clarity, research on the unique multi-dimensional features of aging and precarity, the delineation of allied concepts and emerging applications, and the importance of linking research results with processes of theory building and the development of policy directives for change.
Keywords: Later life, Risk, Insecurity, Disability, Im/migration
5
Background and Objectives
Evidence for increased insecurity in later life has emerged from factors associated with
economic pressures on public services, precarious forms of employment, and negative
perceptions about the implications of population aging. Indeed, beneath accolades of
longevity as a story of success comes evidence of widening inequality among older
people, especially when viewed in the context of declining social protection (Biggs,
2014; Ferraro & Shippee, 2009; Rek-Woźniak, 2014). However, while risks of precarity
related to labor and/or im/migrationi are well-documented for early stages of the life
course, the implications of such transitions are often overlooked in late life (Portacolone,
2013). This is especially the case where the realities of aging and the need for care
confront insecurities amidst individualized interpretations of risk and responsibility. In
this context, economic and political conditions can be added to the myriad of factors that
affect late life (Dumas & Turner, 2015; Grenier et al., 2017a; Phillipson, 2015). The
concern when exploring contemporary experiences of aging, particularly among
disadvantaged groups, is that without proper recognition of the intersections between risk,
insecurities, and appropriately designed preventative efforts, the lives of a growing
number of older people may become characterized by precarity rather than by the
dominant positive frameworks of health and success (Grenier & Phillipson, 2018).
The concept of precarity refers to insecurities and risks in the context of economic
and social change, the hazards of contemporary life that result from globalization and
neo-liberalization, and declining social protection (Grenier & Phillipson, 2018).
According to Waite (2009), precarity denotes “life worlds characterized by uncertainty
and insecurity,” and implies “both a condition and a possible rallying point for
resistance” (p. 426). In an effort to clarify how precarity is understood and applied, Millar
(2017) outlines three ways the term is used: as a social condition, a category, and an
experience that includes action to counter precarity. The concept has also been widely
used in fields such as labor studies, geography, and social work, with a tendency to focus
on labor and/or im/migration (Lewchuk, Clark & Wolff, 2008; Standing, 2011; Waite,
2009). Yet, the extension of this thinking is only beginning to reach into interdisciplinary
studies of aging, social gerontology, and late life.
6
Work is now underway to consider what the concept of precarity might offer
understandings of aging and late life. The period since 2008, marked by the financial
crisis in countries such as the UK and the USA, has seen increased interest in the idea of
precarity related to aging. The case being made is that precarity or precarious conditions
that may be experienced in earlier stages of the life course do not simply stop at
retirement. Instead, precarity is multi-dimensional, may emerge at particular social
locations, and/or extend from particular transitions or intersecting disadvantages that are
carried into late life. Precarity may come about in situations such as living alone (Grenier
et al., 2017a; Portacolone, 2013), as a result of the need for care (Grenier et al., 2017a;
2018; Polivka & Luo, 2017), or deepen through the impact of austerity (Evans &
McBride, 2017). Yet, available insights on precarity are scattered across a range of fields
and disciplines, often intertwined with related allied concepts such as disadvantage,
exclusion or vulnerability.
Our study aimed to map existing conceptualizations of precarity in relation to
aging and later life, identify key themes, and to consider how these ideas have been
applied in two relevant sub-fields of study. This paper begins with a description of the
two stage scoping review methodology and outlines the research questions. It then
summarizes the methods and findings for the first scoping review on precarity and aging
(Phase I), followed by a presentation of the methods and findings for the second set of
additional scoping reviews in relation to im/migration/aging, and disability/aging (Phase
II). It concludes with a summary of key tendencies, study limitations, and proposed
directions for research and conceptual development.
Research Design and Methodology: A Two Stage Scoping Review
A scoping review methodology was selected as the most appropriate means to understand
how precarity has been conceptualized and used in the literature on aging ii. A scoping
review is an approach designed to summarize current knowledge and identify gaps in an
existing area of research, on a particular topic or concept (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005;
Grant & Booth, 2009; Levac, Colquhoun, & O'Brien, 2010). The aim of a scoping review
is to provide a broad map of an existing research literature, typically guided by a question
(or set of questions) intended to sketch the parameters – or scope—of a topic (Armstrong,
7
Hall, Doyle & Waters, 2011; Heyn, Meeks & Pruchno, 2019). Scoping reviews are
increasingly present in social gerontology and have been carried out in areas such as
spousal caregiving, ageism and work, and civic participation (Arbel, Bingham, &
Dawson, 2019; Harris, Krygsman, Waschenko, & Laliberte-Rudman, 2017; Serrat,
Scharf, Villar & Gómez, 2019).
In this case, a two-stagephase scoping review was selected to map existing
knowledge with regards to aging and precarity, and to explore areas of theoretical and
practical relevance in the field. Our review drew on the framework of Arksey and
O’Malley (2005), supplemented by methodological suggestions provided by Levac et al.
(2010). Our scoping review followed five steps of the Arksey and O’Malley (2005)
framework: (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying relevant studies; (3)
study selection; (4) charting the data; and (5) collating, summarizing and reporting the
results (also see Levac et al., 2010; Tricco et al., 2016)iii.
The research questions identified to guide this two-stage phase review were: Q1-
How is precarity currently defined and conceptualized in relation to aging and/or late
life? Q2. What themes emerge in relation to precarity and aging? Q3: How is precarity
used and applied in two relevant subfields on aging? Phase I of the review documented
definitions, conceptual understandings of precarity in later life, and key themes. Phase II
extended the inquiry to two specific sub-fields where ideas about precarity and aging had
been applied: that of aging among im/migrants, and aging with a disability. Our scoping
review included a qualitative content analysis of the charted data, resulting in emergent
themes, as well as a detailed exploration of two sub-set areas of study relevant to
precarity and aging (see Aronson, 1995; Braun et al., 2018; Hsieh and Shannon, 2005;
Levac et al., 2010).
Phase I Methodology: Definitions and Emergent Themes
In Phase I, four of the authors selected keywords employed to identify relevant studies
were selected by four of the authors (see Figure 1). Research in social gerontology is
located across disciplinary and inter-disciplinary aging-specific journals, with the inter-
disciplinary reach of precarity necessitating a range of databases. The aspects of life
worlds and insecurity that were considered central to key definitions on precarity (see
8
Millar, 2017; Waite, 2009), evoke relationships between social structures and individual
experiences—ideas often expressed through the life course in gerontology (see Dannefer
& Settersten, 2010; Grenier, 2012). Given that precarity likely unfolds throughout life,
our search included keywords such as risk and insecurities that were considered central to
definitions of precarity, as well as terms used to study aging and the life course, such as
vulnerability, trajectories, and transitions (See Figure 1).
After consultation with a reference librarian, five electronic bibliographic
databases were selected based on their appropriateness and the likelihood to contain the
majority of the academic literature for the research questions (i.e. non-grey literature)
(See Figure 1). These included: ProQuest Sociology; EBSCO (AgeLine, Sociological
Abstracts); Web of Science; Scholars Portal; and Google Scholar/Google Books.
Specialized and non-social science databases such as PubMed were excluded, with
medical studies of risk falling outside the scope of our focus. A record of all search terms
was maintained to optimize reproducibility. Corresponding with the scoping review
method of Arksey and O’Malley (2005), and supplemented by the suggestions of Levac
et al. (2010), the database was searched independently by two researchers to improve
reliability.
Figure 1 here
The two-stage phase scoping review process is summarized in Figure 2. Phase I
resulted in 33,990 hits. Studies were selected if they focused on precarity in the context of
aging and later life, were written in English, peer-reviewed, and available electronically
in full-text. The decision to include or exclude articles began with a title review, followed
by a review of abstracts, table of contents, and book introductions. Study selection
followed a team approach (Levac et al., 2010), with decisions to exclude or include
ambiguous texts confirmed by two team members. Prior to independent data extraction, a
trial was conducted in which two team members extracted data from the same three
articles and added these to a summary template (i.e. charting the data). Extracted results
were then compared as part of the iterative process of this scoping review, and all aspects
of the template were discussed to ensure a common understanding. Articles were then
divided between three researchers for independent extraction. In order to ensure
congruence, a second researcher reviewed every fifth article. Once extraction was
9
complete, all researchers reviewed all extraction tables and any discrepancies in data
included in various sections were discussed and resolved.
Through this process, 1,137 titles were deemed potentially relevant, 81 of these
were duplicate articles, which were removed. 1056 papers were scanned and reviewed for
relevance to the topic, producing a final sample of 131 for Phase Iiv. The full texts of 131
papers were then reviewed in detail. Uncertainties about study inclusion were resolved
through discussion between two team members. Overall, a total of 31 documents were
selected for Phase I analysis. Information was extracted from each of the 31 articles,
charting the results using the descriptive analytical method and Microsoft Word data-
charting forms (see Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; also Levac et al., 2010). Bibliographic
details, study methodology (i.e., design/approach, sample, data collection), the definition
or conceptual framework used, key themes or areas of applied focus, and empirical
findings were charted for each of the selected studies. A thematic analysis was then
carried out on the charted material, as suggested by Levac et al., (2010) (also see Aronson
1995; Braun et al., 2018; Hseih and Shannon, 2005)v. Both phases of this two stage
scoping review were completed by May 2018.
Figure 2 here
Phase I: Results on Precarity and Aging
The review of the 31 articles resulted in definitions of precarity, and an identification of
key themes, and particular applications of precarity with regards to aging. Of the 31
articles, 29 were qualitative, and 2 were mixed-method. 10 studies were published in
aging specific journals, with 21 published in disciplinary journals in sociology, gender
studies, human development, labor law, global discourse, housing, anthropology,
industrial relations, and social policy. Three articles were published in the period of 1998-
2009, with 26 of the articles published between 2011 and 2017, suggesting a growing
popularity of the concept. Key themes, number of articles and author details for Phase I
are outlined in Table 1.
Table 1 here
Q1- How is precarity currently defined and conceptualized? Of the 31 selected
articles, only nine specified a conceptual framework or definition of precarity. Out of the
10
nine, four articles (multiple by the same author) provide a broad conceptualization of
precarity in relation to aging. For example, Craciun & Flick, (2014), refer to ‘precarity’
as “possessing insufficient material resources, but also as an existence defined by
insecurity and unpredictability, which can influence people's thoughts and behaviors” (p.
79). Three articles defined precarity through reference to Standing’s (2011) definition of
‘the precariat’. For instance, Gavanas & Calzada (2016) situate precarity as a category of
people “who lack labor-related security relating to a range of aspects: terms of
employment, social protection, mobility, income and representation” (p. 2). Two articles
defined and conceptualized precarity in reference to differing disciplinary perspectives
articulated by Standing (labor studies/politics) and Butler (cultural studies), thereby
extending the analysis of precarity to experiences of vulnerability and suffering. For
example, Grenier et al. (2017b) discussed that precarity “…underlines the fact that life is
essentially risky…[and]…represents a universal form of insecurity, vulnerability, and
potential suffering” (p. 10).
The intersection between social conditions and experiences of vulnerability was
highlighted across articles which defined precarity and aging. Craciun and Flick (2014)
for example, describe the precariousness of aging as ‘propelled’ by a climate of social
insecurity, individualization, and the deterioration of social bonds (p. 79). They also
highlight its connection with the risk of poverty in older age, linked to features such as
precarious work, single parenting, immigration status, and negative perceptions of aging.
Portacolone (2013) and Banki (2013) situate precarity in the global context of rising
levels of insecurity in the workplace. Banki (2013) notes that precarity is the condition of
being vulnerable to exploitation because of a lack of security…precarious work is not the
fact of consistent unemployment, but the looming threat...(p.450). Further, Banki’s (2013)
definition of precarity outlines how ‘precarity of residence does not suggest imminent
deportation from a country, but its very real possibility… legal status affects the ability to
secure stable work” (p. 450). As such, this definition expands precarity to include both a
possible future threat, and a social and spatial analysis of the ‘precarity of place’. We turn
now to a consideration of how precarity has been used in relation to aging by
documenting themes that emerged from a review of the selected articles in Phase I.
11
Q2. What are the emergent themes on precarity and aging? The Phase I review
of the articles in Phase I resulted in the identification of identified emergent themes and
applications related to precarity and aging. This article presents these ideas according to a
first sub-set of dominant themes, and a second set of cases where precarity was applied to
particular groups or circumstances. In descending order of appearance, the emergent
themes included: insecurity, labor, vulnerability. The emerging areas of application were:
gender, im/migration, disability, and housing (see Table 1). The first subset comprised
three prevalent themes consistent with broad definitions of precarity. 23 used precarity in
relation to insecurity; 17 used precarity in relation to labor, and 10 used precarity in
relation to, or as vulnerability. Some articles employed more than one of these three
prominent themes, highlighting that precarity is not only discretely about insecurity,
labor, and/or vulnerability, but also the intersections between themes.
A second subset of ideas and uses emerged from a review of Phase I, suggesting
that precarity in later life may be more likely to occur to specific subsets of the
population or in particular circumstances. The breakdown of these uses is as follows: five
articles focused on gender; five on im/migration; five on disability; and three on housing.
These applications suggest that particular sub-populations of older people such as
women, im/migrants, people with disabilities, and people who experience homelessness
may be more susceptible to precarity than others. This is unsurprising given the problems
associated with the precarious work often experienced by these groups, including
economic insecurity, under-employment, and tensions in family and community life.
Although definitions were often unspecified across these articles, the applications to
particular populations or circumstances provide clues to teasing out understandings and
the meanings of precarity.
Digging deeper into how precarity was used reveals sets of ideas that are
beginning to circulate. The five articles that included a specific focus on gender
highlighted issues of care work, the overrepresentation of women in part-time
employment, and the intersecting impacts of im/migration, disability, vulnerability and
risk on older women’s lives. Five authors addressed im/migration in the context of
worsening economic conditions, informal care, a lack of labor protection and/or social
security, including how this could affect older im/migrants. Grenier et al., (2017a) for
12
example, drew attention to the intersecting dimensions of precariousness, and the
consequences of socio-economic disparities experienced by women, people with
disabilities, and im/migrants that were carried into late life. Three authors discussed how
housing, living alone, and renting may place older people at risk of being unable to
support themselves through retirement (even with pension), as well as how precarious
housing is interconnected with the risk of homelessness. The next section turns to Phase
II of the review.
Phase II: Supplementary Scoping Reviews of Two Applications
Phase II: Design and Methods
Phase II was an exploration of two applications that emerged in Phase I: precarity and
aging among older im/migrants, and the precarity of older people with disabilities. Given
that only 9 of the 31 articles in Phase I included a definition of the concept, In Phase II
our team turned to this supplementary reviewed to explore how precarity had been used
in two sub-fields of study related to aging. The subsets of im/migration and disability
were selected for further review based on the connections with definitional issues the
concepts of insecurity, labor and vulnerability considered central to definitions of
precarity. , and with previous research in the field. Gender was not pursued at this point
in time because it was considered to cut across the population groups and analysis should
be carried out across all locations. Housing was excluded for this review because it
appeared less frequently. However, our research leads us to believe this relationship
should be further explored.
The two additional scoping reviews carried out in Phase II aimed to address the
question: How is precarity defined and used in relation to im/migration and disability in
later life? The Phase II additional scoping reviews followed the steps and team-based
approach outlined for Phase I. The selection of texts for Phase II began with a title
review, followed by a review of abstracts, table of contents and/or introductions (see
Arksey and O’Malley, 2005; ). In this Phase, the process of selecting studies was much
less direct than is implied in the scoping review framework, and much more iterative (see
Levac et al., 2010). Given the limited results of title search on the concepts related to
im/migration AND disability, search terms were broadened to use OR rather than AND
(e.g. Precarity OR aging OR Im/migration). Once an initial pool was identified, we then
13
carried out a detailed review to identify relevant studies that mentioned aging or late life.
Figure 2 summarizes the number of texts included in each step. Results are presented
separately for each of the supplementary scoping reviews on im/migration and on
disability (see Tables 2 and 3).
Im/migration. The Phase II focus on precarity and im/migration employed a title
the search of the terms on aging OR Immigration, Migration, Migrant, Foreign born,
Immigrant, Newcomer, in the titles to identify relevant articles (See Figure 1). This search
resulted in 126,340 hits (See Figure 2). Two researchers than then narrowed the studies to
a pool of 3,533 relevant results that included themes related to precarity, aging and
im/migrationvi. After removing duplicates and book reviews, 209 texts on precarity, aging
and im/migration were identified (documents appearing in both Phase I and II after
selection were retained). A final pool of 51 articles on precarity and im/migration with
relevance for aging and late life were selected for full review. Of the selected articles, 25
studies were quantitative, 20 were qualitative, and the remaining 6 were mixed-method.
17 of the papers reviewed were published in journals on cross cultural and ethnic
diversity, with 9 focused on gerontology and aging. The remaining 25 were scattered
across psychology, public health, nursing, surgery, medicine, family studies, social work,
and social policy.
Table 2 here
Disability. The Phase II focus on precarity and disability employed the search
terms on aging OR Disability, Disabled, Debility, Disablement, Impairment, Handicap*
to identify articles (see Figure 1). This resulted in 61,390 hits (see Figure 2). After
reviewing, 3,020 results were selected, further scanned and reviewed for relevance.
Duplicates and book reviews were removed, resulting in 62 texts (retaining those
identified in Phase I). A final pool of 39 articles on disability related to aging and
precarity was selected for full review. Of the 39 selected articles, 6 were quantitative, 28
were qualitative and the remaining 5 were mixed-method. 21 of the papers selected for
review were scattered across sociology, medicine, labor, and occupational therapy, with
10 from nursing and/or applied health, 6 focused on aging in gerontology and 2 focused
14
on theory and political science. A number of overlapping terms emerged in in this theme
of precarity and disability. For example, 33 of the articles used precarity in conjunction
with risk, vulnerability, insecurity, and/or uncertainty. The concepts of frail or frailty
were also used in 25 of the articles in relation to functional impairment. We now turn to
discuss the content of these two applications as a means to better understand precarity
and aging.
Table 3 here
15
Phase II Results: Concepts and Themes
Q3: How is precarity defined and used in relation to aging and im/migration? Only two
of the 51 selected articles in the theme on precarity and im/migration included a
definition of precarity (see Table 2). Writing specifically on aging and migration, Paret &
Gleeson (2016) defined precarity among older migrants as being synonymous with
uncertainty, unpredictability, and ‘the unpredictability of terror’. They outlined older
migrants experiences of precarity as being comprised of ‘at risk of losing …attachments
[to others], …[and] at risk of violence by virtue of that exposure’ (p.279). In drawing on
im/migration as an illustration of precarity in later life, Grenier et al., (2017a) referred to
‘precarity’ as a language to explain how older im/migrants face barriers to stable labor
contributions, and as a result may experience low income, and/or other markers of
disadvantage that intersect with health and the need for care in later years. The relative
absence of conceptual grounding in 49 of the 51 articles on aging and im/migration is
problematic. Although this application resulted in less clear themes, a range of ideas and
uses emerged.
A number of uses were identified in the scoping review on precarity, aging, and
im/migration (See Table 2). Of the 51 articles selected for full review, 13 outlined the
intersections between care, labor, gender, and health. Lahaei et al., (2013) for example,
outlined how women and first-generation immigrant caregivers were more likely to report
poor job outcomes such as quitting work, retiring early, or reducing hours involuntarily.
11 papers referred to the social determinants of health, the barriers older im/migrants
faced in access to primary healthcare and/or mental health services, and noted the need
for better im/migrant care. For example, Ahmed et al., (2016) outlined how language and
communication, socio-economic status, health system structure, and knowledge of the
systems all act as barriers for older im/migrants.
Of the 51 articles selected for full review, eight highlighted the detrimental
effects of low educational attainment, working conditions, and low paid work carried out
by visible minority women. An additional 8 articles outlined how structural factors and
policy configurations shaped and affected the lives of older im/migrants. For instance,
Ferrer et al., (2017) discussed how systems of domination could impinge on the everyday
lives of racialized older people. A further six articles referred to financial strain and
16
economic insecurity, low standards of living, and greater likelihood of poverty. The 4
remaining articles flagged experiences of social isolation, loneliness, and social
participation, and one mentioned the housing challenges experienced by older
im/migrantsvii. Taken together, what emerged from the review of the application of
precarity to aging and im/migration was that precarity among older migrants is a
condition of unpredictability; a category interconnected with allied notions of risk,
insecurity and exclusion; and an experience that often involves health issues, barriers to
health and social care services, and povertyviii.
Q3: How is precarity defined and used in relation to aging and disability?
Of the 39 articles on precarity, aging and disability, only five defined and conceptualized
precarity in late life (See Table 3)ix. In these articles, disability was used across a range of
situations, but most notably as a result of work place injuries or in the case of dementia.
Portacolone (2013) for example, defined precarity in the context of vulnerability
(physical, mental, emotional, financial) as a result of vanishing resources (p. 167). This
included attention to quality of life differences between fully employed workers and
‘precarious’ workers stripped of guarantees and benefits (health insurance, security,
retirement income (p. 168). Grenier et al., (2017a; 2017b) employed precarity as a
‘shared process and experience of vulnerability over time’ (p. 319). They also suggested
that the long-term impacts of disadvantage may become more pronounced as a result of
the need for care in the context of reduced social protection. Where Casas-Corte (2014)
underscored the importance of activism in the context of reduced against constrained
social commitments and unstable work that leads to disadvantage in late life (p. 211).
Similarly, Riach & Loretto (2009) used precarity to describe the difficulties faced by
workers who become ‘non-workers’ and to describe the process of transition into and out
of disability identities. Although this application included conceptual definitions, the five
articles stretched across situations, and did not include the experiences of people with
lifelong disabilities. Focus on the themes and uses that emerged from the 39 selected
articles was thus necessary to glean further insight into precarity, aging and disability.
Two prominent themes that emerged from the scoping review of precarity, aging,
and disability (See Table 3) were: labour insecurity and health-related vulnerabilities. 13
17
of the 39 selected articles focused on insecure employment, structural insecurities that
impede labor force entry, and the relationship between aging, disability, and insecure
housing. This included a discussion of the “precaritisation” of living with a disability and
the impact of neoliberal policies. Dumas, Savage, & Stuart (2014) for example, described
the context of unstable work, use of social assistance, and lives characterized by social
and material deprivation. Drawing on the idea of a “precarious economic equilibrium” (p.
469) they outline how “precarious socioeconomic conditions…lower an individual’s
disposition toward health-enhancing practices, preventative actions, or even contemplate
future projects related to the body” (p. 460-461). A further nine papers focused on the
health related implications of vulnerability and low-income for people with disabilities.
Articles outlined how insecure and precarious conditions can affect illness prevention,
well-being, and stability in later life.
A second set of articles highlighted social locations of focused on the intersecting
impacts of disadvantage. Although somewhat difficult to disentangle conceptually, the
results are presented according to how the ideas were used in this application to aging and
disability. Six articles referred to the challenges experienced by women whose jobs led to
disability and/or the uptake of a disability pension. For example, Gannon & Munley
(2009), outline how precarity illustrated how disability impedes employment in a
gendered context where ‘good workers’ are crafted in particular ways that by social
structures and practices, produce ing for example, wage disparities. Six articles described
precarity as a social and embodied experience related to allied concepts of debility, risk,
and frailty. Shildrick (2015) for example, links contemporary conditions with inequality
and health impacts, with precarity described as a feature of “contemporary capitalism
and neo-liberal politics whereby disability and ill-health are unevenly distributed, and
where there is a large group of individuals for whom there is no “getting better” (p. 16-
17). A further five papers described how living with a disability can heighten risks of
exclusion and/or marginalization in later life, with the remaining five papers highlighting
the need for a new language surrounding disability, risk, and vulnerability. Although
further conceptual work is needed in this sub-field, the results of Phase II suggest that
precarity related to aging and disability is a function of capitalism and neoliberal politics;
a category related to disadvantage and risk; and an experience marked by poverty,
18
vulnerability and marginalization/exclusionx. We now turn to summarize key findings,
reflections, and future directions for social gerontology.
Discussion
This article presented a two-phase stage scoping review on precarity in later life,
including definitions, themes, and an exploration of how the concept was used uses in
two sub-areas of im/migration and disability. Results of the scoping review suggest that
the concept of precarity is beginning to be extended into situations related to aging and
late life. However, the relative absence of conceptual grounding across the scoping
reviews it also revealed that the concept is under-theorized and relatively poorly defined
with regards to aging. Social gerontology has been described by Birren and Bengston
(1998) as ‘data rich and theory poor’, and the current gap on precarity and aging is no
exception. Confusion about what precarity and precariousness may mean in relation to
aging will cause methodological problems in measurement, and could pose future issues
confusion should the concept be extended to policy use in international frameworks,
organisational practices, or targeted service responses for older people. Only 12 of the
articles provided a definition of precarity (i.e., 9 of 31 in Phase I; 2 of 51 on
im/migration; 5 of 39 on disability, with 4 repeats across Phase I and II). The results of
this two-stage scoping review thus highlight the pressing need to define and articulate the
conceptual boundaries of precarity through research-based studies.
The thematic analysis of the selected articles revealed common points of focus on
labor, insecurity/risk, vulnerability, and uncertainty as it pertains to structured conditions
and older people’s lives. Among those with stated definitions, many were anchored in
some way to Standing’s (2011) work on ‘the precariat’, or to the relationship between
structural factors related to work and financial insecurity. There was, however, another
key set of ideas that extended beyond work, into experiences of the human condition
related to vulnerability, processes of aging, and/or disadvantage over time. Such
articulations were often linked to the cultural definitions interpretations of precarity that
are linked to the scholarship of used articulated by Butler (2009), and/or were situated in
relation to allied concepts of risk, frailty and vulnerability. In this the deployment of
precarity as part of the human condition, experiences of precarity were often
conceptualized and discussed through reference to particular transitions or trajectories
19
that were often about the need for care, and/or the impact of intersecting social locations
of disadvantage as they were structured and experienced over the life course. As such,
discussions of precarity, even when focused on work, were about more than the impacts
of labor alone.
The uses of precarity in the selected articles in Phase I and II articles suggest that
particular trajectories or social locations alter experiences of aging and late life. For
example, gender, im/migration, disability, housing, health, and care emerged as situations
of disadvantage and/or sites of precarity. Here, results suggest the need to explore the
potential linkages between precarity and intersectionality, and in particular, how
intersecting forms of disadvantage may cause, sustain or worsen precarity in late life (see
Collins & Bilge, 2016; Crenshaw, 1990; Ferrer et al., 2017; Koehn et al., 2013). What
theoretical, conceptual, and methodological possibilities might exist? What can each
approach offer understandings of inequality in later life? While results suggest the
emergence of the concept of precarity as a means to signify and discuss how particular
social locations of disadvantage and inequality, as well as the ways in which these may
intersect across lives and over time, results from Phase II also raise the possibility that
there may be of notable differences between locations such as disability or im/migration.
The uses of precarity thus highlight the need to define conceptual boundaries and
distinguish the shared, intersectional, and particular forms of disadvantage that operate
across the life course and into late life.
The scoping review revealed the need to explore what might make the experience
of precarity unique in late life, building on understandings in other fields and allied
concepts in social gerontology. Outside of gerontology, the general literature on precarity
tends to focus on labor, changing social conditions, and/or vulnerability, with the analysis
of such features implicitly ending at retirement age (see Grenier, Phillipson & Settersten,
forthcoming; Millar, 2017). And yet, whilst this tendency approach is certainly carried
into the application of precarity with regards to late life, the emerging literature in social
gerontology suggests that particular trajectories of risk heighten precarity across the life
course and in late life. Understanding precarity in this way may be increasingly relevant
for gerontology given the more fluid understandings of the life course which are
unsettling the fixed notions of age and stage-based thinking upon which gerontology has
20
been built. Aging as an im/migrant or with a disability are case in point of how social
locations impact transitions, trajectories, and lives. What becomes evident in drawing
together the scoping review results is that precarity in later life may have a higher
incidence for some groups, in particular circumstances, or under particular conditions.
Two interlinked conditions stand out as notable. The first is the onset of the need
for care as a turning point which may provoke precarity. The second is that the risk or
insecurity associated with that is described as precarity in later life may be experienced as
especially risky for groups who rely on public services, as a result of declining social
commitments and the a general shortage of public programs. As such, the emerging
understandings of precarity, regardless of the particular trajectory of insecurity or risk,
can serve to locate experiences in the contemporary neo-liberal context, and as having
structural causes. It is precisely this use that helps illustrate how the concept of precarity
differs from individual attributes of risk commonly assigned to older people, and shifts
the focus to a shared condition or experience that is produced and compounded by
declining resources, the absence of formal structures of support, and a general lack of
access to care. As such, precarity is it is perhaps produced when precisely the shortage of
‘time left’ (or a lack of opportunity to alter circumstances via labor is combined with a
the need for care that must be purchased from the market, that produces precarity in later
life (Grenier et al., 2017a; also see Settersten, forthcoming).
Two key points underline the importance of developing the concept of precarity in
the field of aging. First, there is a need to more clearly identify the transitional moments,
trajectories, or circumstances that cause or worsen precarity for older people. Where one
may move in and out of situations of risk and precariousness throughout life, aging and
late life may bring about, or crystalize, the impacts of disadvantage and inequality. In this
sense, there is considerable potential to link with life course approaches and studies of
cumulative advantage and disadvantage (Dannefer & Settersten, 2010; Ferraro &
Shippee, 2009; Grenier, 2012) and vulnerability as it relates to inequality (Grabovschi,
Loignon & Fortin, 2013; Grenier, forthcoming). The intersections of disadvantage and
change over time seem particularly relevant. Our suggestion is that precarity offers a
complementary lens to understand inequality by building on existing models such as
cumulative advantage and disadvantage, the social determinants of health, and/or social
21
exclusion from an inter-disciplinary perspective that is inter-disciplinary and offers
insights from older people (see Marmot & Wilkinson, 2005; Raphael, 2009; Van
Regenmortel et al., 2016; Walsh, Scharf & Keating, 2017). The illustrative power of
precarity may thus be in understanding how disadvantage intersects and accumulates
across the life course and into late life, through encounters with structures such as work
or care, and how it does so through social locations and relational encounters enacted in
and across local, national and global contexts.
Second, another key issue identified across both phases of this review was the
need to examine how related concepts intersect, and to delineate where they may be
distinct or unique. Results reveal both gaps in the field, and a lack of clarity in the
associations that are currently being made between precarity and allied concepts such as
risk, vulnerability, exclusion, intersectionality and cumulative disadvantage. The results
of this two stage scoping review highlight the need to delineate the conceptual boundaries
of precarity in relation to allied concepts. Results suggest that features such as risk,
insecurity, and vulnerability are instrumental in producing or deepening precarity, yet the
means by which this happens are less clear. Further, the conceptual delineations are fuzzy
—is precarity the same as being at high risk? Where does risk or insecurity end and
precarity begin? And how are these states or experiences affected by larger structural
factors, structures, social conditions such as austerity, and/or interpersonal relationships?
There are also a number of questions that can be raised about the association between
precarity and with concepts such as frailty, and vulnerability (Grenier, forthcoming). As
such, the results reveal both conceptual limitations and important pathways for future
development with regards to structures, conditions or features, and lived experiences.
The suggestion being made is not that allied concepts and intersections be
collapsed into a catch-all category of precarity. Rather, that future research and theory-
building in social gerontology should aim to delineate what distinguishes precarity in late
life, as well as identify the shared features of insecurity and risk as a means of informing
that could be used to inform public policy. ies and address the conditions that cause or
worsen precarity. As such, understanding the distinctions between concepts, ideas and
practices that are made possible through the lens of precarity could may hold powerful
22
insights and potential pathways to dismantle unequal power relations that marginalize
specific groups of older people (e.g., women, im/migrants, people with disability)xi.
This scoping review leads us to suggest directions to extend the analysis of
precarity in later life including: mapping how precarity may differ in late life given
trajectories over time, and in situations such as under employment marginalization from
full-time paid work, impairment and chronic conditions; how precarity—or ‘precarious
trajectories’—may be compounded through longevity and inequalities experienced over
the life course; the identification of particular trajectories of risk or disadvantage
intersecting experiences that may cause precarity to emerge or deepen over time; and how
precarity may be prevented or worsened through social relations, such as institutional
and organizational practices, institutions, organisations, policy and/or in particular
conditions such as those of austerity or and the rise of populism. One particular concern
with regards to older im/migrants for example, is that of aging against the backdrop of an
ever-widening anti-im/migrant sentiment which may deepen the risks of precarity among
older people from im/migrant backgrounds, either through being deemed ineligible for
services or not receiving care (see Demby & Northridge, 2018).
In sum, the results of this two-stage phased scoping review highlight the need to
develop research that can identify the unique features of aging in precarity that currently
remain hidden and/or unaddressed, and to consider these against social conditions and the
backdrop of the life course. The results of this scoping review signal the potential of
precarity as an analytic concept for understanding disadvantage and inequality in relation
to aging and late life. Yet, as is evident from this review, there is a substantial need for
research-based inquiries into the multidimensionality and complexity of precarity in later
life and amidst contemporary conditions. This includes attention to social conditions,
shared human vulnerability, and globally yet contextually situated needs. In practice,
researchers must attempt to articulate how experiences at particular social locations and
in specific contexts are also shaped by global conditions such as in the case of
im/migration and care. This includes attention to For example, tThis may mean
articulating both the commonalities and differences between experiences of precarity in
relation to im/migration, poverty and living alone, disability, and low income. It also
means considering how the experiences of precarity are extremely relevant in the context
23
of demographic change and declining social protection. It is our hope that researchers
will build on this analysis to identify further applications that shed light on precarity and
its consequences for aging and late life.
Limitations
This review draws together disparate understandings of precarity in later life across a
range of disciplines, fields, and topics areas as a means to clarify the concept map
existing understandings and provide a solid platform for research on the study of
precarity in aging and late life. There are however several limitations to be considered
when interpreting findings. First, only five social sciences-based databases were
searched, which limited the number of sources reviewed. Limiting the search to journal
articles meant that results reported in books, research reports or grey literature were
missed. Although initially included, it was impossible to produce reliable scoping review
results from book chapters, despite the fact that conceptual discussions often happen in
book chapters. Second, the review included only English language articles, thus
potentially eliminating studies which could contribute more to a multi-contextual
understanding of precarity. Third, determining the disciplinary background of the
selected contributions also proved problematic due to the nature of inter-disciplinary
studies and inter-disciplinary focus of social gerontology. That being said, the scoping
review offers important initial insights into a small but growing interest in gerontology,
providing a point of guidance for future empirical and conceptual work on precarity in
late life.
Conclusion
This two phase stage review contributes to a growing knowledge base on precarity and
aging by mapping out definitions, key themes and areas of application, and pointing to
areas for further conceptualization, refinement, and study. In sum, the results of this
scoping review highlight both the potential of the concept of precarity for social
gerontology, and the need for conceptual clarity to guide research and inform better
responses to inequality in the context of population aging. The results of this review
sketched support for extending the analysis of precarity into late life, and for detailing
24
how precarity may be somewhat different as people move across the life course, exit the
labor market, and encounter the care system either as caregivers or as someone in need of
care. In this light, care may become the crucial turning point which amplifies—or perhaps
renders visible—the risks and insecurities produced over the life course. It may also be
the moment whereby risks and insecurities worsen in the context of declining social
commitments.
Our suggestion is that the concept of precarity holds potential for understanding
and analysing disadvantage and inequality in aging and late life. Although
complementary to (and built in relation to upon) allied concepts such as intersectionality
or cumulative disadvantage, the concept of precarity provides a different angle of analysis
that is inter-disciplinary, and derived from older people’s insights of how altered
insecurities, risks, and social conditions may impact their lives. Although much
conceptual clarity is needed, the emerging knowledge on precarity draws attention to the
crucial importance of the relationship between structures and lives. It highlights the
intersection and long-term impacts of social locations considered precarious, namely how
these vary and intersect based on age (including advanced age), gender, ‘race’, ability,
and im/migration status. As such, the concept of precarity highlights how disadvantage,
insecurity, and later life poverty remain fundamental challenges for aging societies across
the globe. It is only by sharing, synthesizing, and building upon our existing scholarship
that we can begin to think about how to effectively and efficiently respond to these
challenges of inequality and disadvantage in later life.
25
References
Ahmed, S., Shommu, N. S., Rumana, N., Barron, G. R., Wicklum, S., & Turin, T. C. (2016). Barriers to Access of Primary Healthcare by Immigrant Populations in Canada: A Literature Review. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 18(6), 1522-1540. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10903-015-0276-z
Arbel, I., Bingham, K. S., & Dawson, D. R. (2019). A Scoping Review of Literature on Sex and Gender Differences Among Dementia Spousal Caregivers. The Gerontologist. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny177
Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Armstrong, R., Hall, B. J., Doyle, J., & Waters, E. (2011). ‘Scoping the scope’ of a cochrane review. Journal of Public Health, 33(1), 147-150. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdr015
Aronson, J. (1995). A pragmatic view of thematic analysis. The qualitative report, 2(1), 1-3. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol2/iss1/3
Banki, S. (2013). Precarity of place: A complement to the growing precariat literature. Global Discourse, 3(3-4), 450-463. https://doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2014.881139
Biggs, S. (2014). Precarious ageing versus the policy of indifference: International trends and the G20. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 33(4), 226–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajag.12204
Birren, J. E., & Bengtson, V. L. (1988). Emergent theories of aging. Springer Publishing Co.
Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N., & Terry, G. (2018). Thematic analysis. Handbook of research methods in health social sciences, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_103-1
Butler, J. (2009) Frames of War: When is life grievable? London: Verso.Casas-Cortés, M. (2014). A genealogy of precarity: A toolbox for rearticulating
fragmented social realities in and out of the workplace. Rethinking Marxism, 26(2), 206-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/08935696.2014.888849
Collins, P. H., & Bilge, S. (2016). Intersectionality. John Wiley & Sons.Craciun, C., & Flick, U. (2014). “I will never be the granny with rosy cheeks”:
Perceptions of aging in precarious and financially secure middle-aged Germans. Journal of aging studies, 29, 78-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2014.01.003
Crenshaw, K. (1990). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stan. L. Rev., 43, 1241. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
Dannefer, D., & Settersten, R. A. (2010). The study of the life course: Implications for social gerontology. The SAGE handbook of social gerontology, 3-19. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446200933.n1
Demby, N., & Northridge, M. E. (2018). Delivering Equitable Care to Underserved Communities. American Journal of Public Health, 108(11), 1446. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304701
26
Dumas, A., Savage, M., & Stuart, S. (2014). Anti-normative lifestyles in cardiac rehabilitation: Underpriviledged men’s post-heart incident lives. Health, 18(5), 458-475. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363459313507587
Dumas, A., & Turner, B. S. (2015). Introduction: Human longevity, utopia, and solidarity. The Sociological Quarterly, 56(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/tsq.12081
Evans, B. M., & McBride, S. (Eds.). (2017). Austerity: The lived experience. University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781487515584
Ferrer, I., Grenier, A., Brotman, S., & Koehn, S. (2017). Understanding the experiences of racialized older people through an intersectional life course perspective. Journal of Aging Studies, 41, 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2017.02.001
Ferraro, K. F., & Shippee, T. P. (2009). Aging and cumulative inequality: How does inequality get under the skin? The Gerontologist, 49(3), 333-343. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnp034
Gannon, B., & Munley, M. (2009). Age and disability: Explaining the wage differential. Social Science & Medicine, 69(1), 47-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.04.013
Gavanas, A., & Calzada, I. (2016). Multiplex Migration and Aspects of Precarization: Swedish Retirement Migrants to Spain and their Service Providers. Critical Sociology, 42(7-8), 1003-1016. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920516628306
Grabovschi, C., Loignon, C., & Fortin, M. (2013). Mapping the concept of vulnerability related to health care disparities: a scoping review. BMC health services research, 13(1), 94. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-94
Goodin, R. E. (1999). The real worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge University Press.Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types
and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Grenier, A. (2012) Transitions and the lifecourse: Challenging the Constructions of ‘growing old’. Bristol: Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1t89dvf
Grenier, A., & Phillipson, C. (2018). Precarious Aging: Insecurity and Risk in Late Life. Hastings Center Report, 48, S15-S18. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.907
Grenier, A., Lloyd, L., & Phillipson, C. (2017b). Precarity in late life: rethinking dementia as a ‘frailed’old age. Sociology of Health & Illness, 39(2), 318-330. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12476
Grenier, A., Phillipson, C., Rudman, D. L., Hatzifilalithis, S., Kobayashi, K., & Marier, P. (2017a). Precarity in late life: Understanding new forms of risk and insecurity. Journal of Aging Studies, 43, 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2017.08.002
Harris, K., Krygsman, S., Waschenko, J., & Laliberte Rudman, D. (2017). Ageism and the older worker: A scoping review. The Gerontologist, 58(2), e1-e14. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnw194
Heyn, P. C., Meeks, S., & Pruchno, R. (2019). Methodological Guidance for a Quality Review Article. The Gerontologist. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny123
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health research, 15(9), 1277-1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
27
Koehn, S., Neysmith, S., Kobayashi, K., & Khamisa, H. (2013). Revealing the shape of knowledge using an intersectionality lens: results of a scoping review on the health and health care of ethnocultural minority older adults. Ageing & Society, 33(3), 437-464. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X12000013
Lahaie, C., Earle, A., & Heymann, J. (2013). An Uneven Burden: Social Disparities in Adult Caregiving Responsibilities, Working Conditions, and Caregiver Outcomes. Research on Aging, 35(3), 243-274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027512446028
Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O'Brien, K. K. (2010). Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation science, 5(1), 69. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
Lewchuk, W., Clarke, M., & De Wolff, A. (2008). Working without commitments: precarious employment and health. Work, employment and society, 22(3), 387-406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017008093477
Marmot, M., & Wilkinson, R. (Eds.). (2005). Social determinants of health. OUP Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198565895.001.0001
Millar, K. M. (2017). Toward a critical politics of precarity. Sociology Compass, 11(6), e12483. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12483
Paret, M., & Gleeson, S. (2016). Precarity and agency through a migration lens. Citizenship Studies, 20(3-4), 277-294. https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2016.1158356
Phillipson, C. (2015). The political economy of longevity: developing new forms of solidarity for later life. The Sociological Quarterly, 56(1), 80-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/tsq.12082
Polivka, L., & Luo, B. (2017). Neoliberal Long-term Care: From Community to Corporate Control. The Gerontologist, 59(2), 222-229. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnx139
Portacolone, E. (2013). The notion of precariousness among older adults living alone in the US. Journal of Aging Studies, 27(2), 166-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2013.01.001
Raphael, D. (Ed.). (2009). Social determinants of health: Canadian perspectives. Canadian Scholars’ Press.
Rek-Woźniak, M. (2014). Transition into adulthood, life course, inequalities and social change. In D. Eibel, E. Rokicka, & J. Leaman (Eds.). Welfare state at risk: Rising inequality in Europe (pp. 137–152). New York: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01481-4_8
Riach, K., & Loretto, W. (2009). Identity work and the unemployed 'worker’: age, disability and the lived experience of the older unemployed. Work, Employment and Society, 23(1), 102-119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017008099780
Serrat, R., Scharf, T., Villar, F., & Gómez, C. (2019). Fifty-Five Years of Research Into Older People’s Civic Participation: Recent Trends, Future Directions. The Gerontologist. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnz021
Shildrick, M. (2015). Living on; not getting better. feminist review, 111(1), 10-24. https://doi.org/10.1057/fr.2015.22
Standing, G. (2011). The Precariat: The new dangerous class. London: Bloomsbury PressTricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K., Colquhoun, H., Kastner, M., ... & Kenny,
M. (2016). A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping
28
reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 16(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4
Van Regenmortel, S., De Donder, L., Dury, S., Smetcoren, A. S., De Witte, N., & Verté, D. (2016). Social exclusion in later life: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Population Ageing, 9(4), 315-344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12062-016-9145-3
Waite, L. (2009). A place and space for a critical geography of precarity? Geography Compass, 3(1), 412–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00184.x
Walsh, K., Scharf, T., & Keating, N. (2017). Social exclusion of older persons: A scoping review and conceptual framework. European Journal of Ageing, 14(1), 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-016-0398-8
29
Figures
Figure 1. Keywords, Databases, and Exclusion CriteriaFigure 2. Flow Chart of the Inclusion Process
Tables
Table 1: Selected Articles Phase I (Precarity and Aging) Table 2: Selected Articles Phase II (Precarity, Aging, Im/migration) Table 3: Selected Articles Phase II (Precarity, Aging, Disability)
30
Figure 1. Keywords, Databases, and Exclusion Criteria
Databases1. ProQuest Sociology 2. EBSCO (AgeLine, Sociological Abstracts) 3. Web of Science 4. Scholars Portal
5. Google Scholar and Google Books
Precarity
Precari*Precarity
Precarious agingVulnerability
Precarious livingPrecarious conditionsPrecarious trajectoriesPrecarious transitions
RiskSocial precarityPrecarious life
Precarity and vulnerabilityPrecarity and low income
Welfare, work and precaritySocial risk
Aging Im/migration Disability
Age stereotypeThird-age identity
Life-course*Critical theory
and GerontologyCritical theory and Geriatrics
Aging and workOlder people
Elder*Geriatric*
Lifelong learningAging and welfare
GerontologyAging or Ageing
AgedSeniorRetiree
Older adult*Older individual*
MigrationMigrant
Foreign bornImmigrantImmigrat*Newcomer
DisabilityDisabledDebility
DisablementImpairmentHandicap*
Exclusion Criteria Not English language Doesn’t include aging/ older adults Doesn’t match with nature of study e.g. environmental catastrophes Is not peer-reviewed Is a dissertation or book * *Note: Although initially included as part of the search strategy, results from books do not appear in
the final included sources
31
Precarity and Aging on
IncludedStudies included in
synthesis(n = 31)
Studies included in synthesis(n = 51)
Studies included in synthesis(n = 39)
Full-text articles assessed for
eligibility(n = 62)
Figure 2. Flow Chart of the Inclusion Process
DisabilityIm/migrationPhase I Phase II
Full-text articles assessed for
eligibility(n = 209)
Full-text articles assessed for
eligibility(n = 131)
Eligibility
Records after duplicates removed
(n =876)
Records after duplicates removed
(n =1,107)
Records identified through database
searching(n = 61,390)
Records identified through database
searching(n =126,340)
Records identified through database
searching(n = 33,990)
Records after duplicates removed
(n =1,056)
Identification
Screening Records screened(n =3,020)
Records screened(n =3,533)
Records screened(n =1,137)
32
Table 1: Selected Articles for Phase I (Precarity and Aging)
Definitions # of Articles Authors and Year
Broad conceptualization of precarity and aging 4 1. Craciun & Flick, 2014; 2. 2015; 3. 2016 4. Portacolone, 2013
Standing’s definition of ‘the precariat’ 3 1. Banki, 2013 2. Biggs, 2015 3. Gavanas & Calzada, 2016
Analysis of specific locations of experience 2 1. Grenier, Lloyd, & Phillipson, 2017 2. Grenier et al, 2017a
Themes
Insecurity 23
1. Banki, 2013, 2. Biggs, 2015 3. Blackham, 2016 4. Chudakova,2017 5. Colic-Peisker et al., 2015 6. Craciun & Flick, 2014; 7. 2015; 8. 2016, 9.
Craciun, C., et al., 2017, 10. D'Amours, 2009,11. Daly & Armstrong 2016 12. Fournier, et al., 2011, 13. Grenier, et al., 2017a, 14. Grenier, et al.,2017b, 15. Hagestad & Settersten Jr,2016, 16. McGann, M., et al., 2016, 17. Oris, M., et
al., 2017 18. Ornellas, et al., 2017, 19. Portacolone, 2013, 20. Pendall, et al.,2012, 21. Sawchuk, & Lafontaine, 2015, 22. Shuey & Willson, 2017, 23.
Walker, 2017
Labor 17
1. Banki, 2013, 2. Blackham, 2016, 3. Chudakova, 2017 4. Craciun & Flick, 2014 5. 2016 6. D'Amours, 2009 7. Daly & Armstrong 2016, 8. Fournier, et al., 2011, 9. Gavanas, & Calzada, 2016 10. Grenier, et al., 2017a 11. Grenier, et al., 2017b, 12. Kolářová, 2015 13. McGann, et al., 2016 14. Oris, et al.,
2017 15. Ornellas, et al., 2017 16. Raymo et al., 2011, 17. Shuey, & Willson, 2017
Vulnerability 10
1.Biggs 2015, 2. Forbes & Hoffart 1998 3. Grenier et al., 2017a 4. Grenier et al., 2017b 5. Happ, 2016 6. Hurd,1999
7. Ornellas et al., 2017 8. Pendall et al, 2012; 9. Portacolone, 2013 10. Walker, 2017
Applications / Uses
Gender 5 1.Craciun, & Flick, 2016 2. Daly & Armstrong, 2016. 3. Grenier et al,2017 4. Hurd, 1999 5. Raymo et al., 2011
Immigration 5 1.Allison, 2012 2.Ciobanu & Hunter, 2017 3. Gavanas, & Calzada, 2016 4. Grenier et al., 2017a 5. Hagestad & Settersten Jr, 2016
Disability 5 1. D'Amours, 2009 2. Daly & Armstrong, 2016 3. Grenier et al, 2017a 4. Kolářová, 2015 5. Shuey, & Willson,2017
Housing 3 1. Colic-Peisker, Ong & Wood, 2015 2. Pendall, Theodos, & Franks, 2012 3. Portacolone,2013
Table 2: Selected Articles Phase II (Precarity, Aging, Im/migration)
Definitions # of Articles Authors and Year
Precarity, uncertainty and unpredictability 1 1. Paret & Gleeson, 2016
Intersecting forms of disadvantage 1 1. Grenier et al, 2017a
Applications/UsesCare and Labor/Gender/Health 13 1. Du, & Xu, 2016 2. Ferrer, Grenier, Brotman, & Koehn, 2017 3. Gee,
Kobayashi & Prus,2004 4. Koehn,Neysmith, Kobayashi, & Khamisa, 2013 5. Lahaie, Earle, & Heymann,2013 6. Lee, & Mason, 2015 7. Lightman, &
33
Gingrich,2013 8. McLaren, 2006 9. Okrainec, Booth, Hollands, & Bell, 2015 10. Preston et al., 2013 11. Nguyen, & Maggard-Gibbons, 2013 12. Shemirani
& O'Connor, 2006 13. Sorkin & Quyen, 2014
Social Determinants, Structure, Access Barriers 11
1. Ahmed, 2016 2. Caxaj & Gill, 2016 3. Dastjerdi, Olson, & Ogilvie, 2012 4. Guruge, Thomson, & Seifi, 2015 5. Koehn, 2009 6. Koehn, Habib &
Bukhari,2016 7. Lai & Surood, 2013 8. Nguyen, 2011 9. Sohn, & Harada, 2004 10. Wilson, Wang, & Stimpson, 2015 11. Woodward, Taylor, Abelson,
& Matusko, 2013 Education Attainment and Labour /
Gender 81.Grenier et al., 2017a 2. Hochbaum, 2012 3. Hyman, 2004 4. Lee, 2011 5. Mukherjee & Diwan, 2016 6. Okrainec, et al, 2015 7. Wakabayashi, 2010 8.
Wu, Triplett, & Sun, 2012
Structural Factors /Policy Changes 8
1.Ciobanu, Fokkema & Nedelcu, 2016 2. Ferrer et al., 2017 3. Grenier et al, 2017a; 4. Koehn, 2009 5. McDonald, 2011 6. Mehta, Elo, Engelman,
Lauderdale, & Kestenbaum, 2016 7. Paret & Gleeson, 2016 8. VanderPlaat, Ramos, & Yoshida, 2012
Socio-Economic status and/or Economic Insecurity 6
1.Basavarajappa, 1999 2. Krause, & Bastida, 2011 3. Coloma, & Pino, 2016 4. Preston et al, 2013 5. Nguyen, & Maggard-Gibbons, 2013 6. Paret & Gleeson,
2016Social Participation, Isolation,
Loneliness 4 1.Ip, Lui & Chui, 2007 2. Sharma & Kemp, 2012 3. Taylor, Forsythe-Brown, Lincoln, & Chatters, 2017 4. Wu, & Penning, 2015
Housing 1 1. Burr, Mutchler, & Gerst, 2010
Table 3: Selected Articles Phase II (Precarity, Aging, Disability)
Definitions # of Articles Authors and Year
Vulnerability (physical, mental, emotional, financial) resulting from
vanishing resources 1 1. Portacolone, 2013
Shared processes and experiences of vulnerability over time 2 1. Grenier et al., 2017a 2. Grenier et al., 2017b
Constraining social commitments, instability/unstable work 2 1. Casas-Corte,2014 2. Riach, & Loretto,2009
Themes
Labor, Insecurity, Structure 13
1.Ansello & O'Neill, 2010 2.Bates, Goodley, Runswick-Cole, 2017 3.Biggs, Simon, Carr, Haapala, 2015
4. Brocklehurst & Laurenson, 2008 5.Dumas, Savage, & 2014 6.Furlotte, Schwartz, Koornstra, &Naster, 2012 7. Gilleard & Higgs, 2010 8. Harris, &
Scully, 2015 9. Miller, Kirk, Alston, & Glos, 2014 10. Moss, 1997 11. Putnam, 2012 12. Robinson, Dauenhauer, Bishop, & Baxter, 2012 13. Weeks
& LeBlanc, 2010
Health, Vulnerability, and Low-income 91. Biggs, Simon, Carr, Haapala, 2015 2. Goods, & Millsteed, 2016 3. Grenier, Lloyd, &Phillipson, 2017 4. Grøn, 2016; 5. Kalleberg; 2009 6. Moor, de Graaf, & Komter, 2013 7. Naylor, et al., 2012 8. Nicholson, Meyer, Flatley, Holman, & Lowton,2012 9. Riach, & Loretto, 2009
34
Applications / Uses
Gender, Social Structure 6 1.Gannon, & Munley, 2009 2. Grenier et al., 2017a 3. Grenier, 2005 4. Sheen, 2017 5. Shildrick, 2015 6. Szanton, Seplaki, Thorpe, Allen, & Fried, 2010
Embodied Experiences, Frailty, Risk 61.Happ, 2016 2. Knight, 2015 3.Lid, 2015 4.Sheen, 2017 5.Shildrick, 2015 6.
van der Meide, Olthuis, & Leget, 2015
Exclusion and Marginalization 51.Cracuin & Flick, 2014 2. Grassman et al., 2012 3. Knight, 2015 4. Ouvrard
et al., 2016 5. Rosati, 2014
Need for a new language surrounding disability (Vulnerability) 5
1.Freedman, 2014 2. Happ, 2016 3. Knight, 2015 4. Lid, 2015 5. Sarvimaki & Stenbock-Hult,2016
Supplementary material
Additional Files I: List of Included Studies
Phase I: Precarity and Aging
35
Allison, A. (2012). Ordinary refugees: Social precarity and soul in 21st century Japan. Anthropological Quarterly, 85(2), 345-370. https://doi.org/10.1353/anq.2012.0027
Banki, S. (2013). Precarity of place: A complement to the growing precariat literature. Global Discourse, 3(3-4), 450-463. https://doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2014.881139
Biggs, S. (2015). Theorising ageing and the question of a long life: eye openings. International Journal of Ageing and Later Life, 10(1), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.3384/ijal.1652-8670.15279
Blackham, A. (2016). Reforming Default Retirement Ages: Regulating Out Precariousness for Older Workers? European Labour Law Journal, 7(1), 4-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/201395251600700102
Chudakova, T. (2017). Caring for Strangers: Aging, Traditional Medicine, and Collective Selfcare in Postsocialist Russia. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 31(1), 78-96. https://doi.org/10.1111/maq.12276
Ciobanu, R. O., & Hunter, A. (2017). Older migrants and (im) mobilities of ageing: An introduction. Population, Space and Place. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2075
Colic-Peisker, V., Ong, R., & Wood, G. (2015). Asset poverty, precarious housing and ontological security in older age: an Australian case study. International Journal of Housing Policy, 15(2), 167-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616718.2014.984827
Craciun, C., & Flick, U. (2014). “I will never be the granny with rosy cheeks”: Perceptions of aging in precarious and financially secure middle-aged Germans. Journal of Aging Studies, 29, 78-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2014.01.003
Craciun, C., & Flick, U. (2015). “I want to be 100 years old, but I smoke too much”: Exploring the gap between positive aging goals and reported preparatory actions in different social circumstances. Journal of Aging Studies, 35, 49-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2015.07.006
Craciun, C., & Flick, U. (2016). Aging in precarious times: exploring the role of gender in shaping views on aging. Journal of women & aging, 28(6), 530-539. https://doi.org/10.1080/08952841.2016.1223896
Craciun, C., Gellert, P., & Flick, U. (2017). Aging in Precarious Circumstances: Do Positive Views on Aging Make a Difference?. The Gerontologist, 57(3), 517-528. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnv135
D'Amours, M. (2009). Non-standard employment after age 50: How precarious is it?. relations industrielles/industrial relations, 209-229. https://doi.org/10.7202/037918ar
Daly, T., & Armstrong, P. (2016). Liminal and invisible long-term care labour: Precarity in the face of austerity. Journal of Industrial Relations, 58(4), 473-490. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022185616643496
Forbes, S., & Hoffart, N. (1998). Elders' decision making regarding the use of long-term care services: A precarious balance. Qualitative Health Research, 8(6), 736-750. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239800800602
36
Fournier, G., Zimmermann, H., & Gauthier, C. (2011). Instable career paths among workers 45 and over: Insight gained from long-term career trajectories. Journal of Aging Studies, 25(3), 316-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2010.11.003
Gavanas, A., & Calzada, I. (2016). Multiplex Migration and Aspects of Precarization: Swedish Retirement Migrants to Spain and their Service Providers. Critical Sociology, 42(7-8), 1003-1016. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920516628306
Grenier, A., Phillipson, C., Rudman, D. L., Hatzifilalithis, S., Kobayashi, K., & Marier, P. (2017a). Precarity in late life: Understanding new forms of risk and insecurity. Journal of Aging Studies, 43, 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2017.08.002
Grenier, A., Lloyd, L., & Phillipson, C. (2017b). Precarity in late life: rethinking dementia as a ‘frailed’old age. Sociology of Health & Illness, 39(2), 318-330. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12476
Hagestad, G. O., & Settersten Jr, R. A. (2016). Aging: It’s interpersonal! Reflections from two life course migrants. The Gerontologist, 57(1), 136-144. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnw117
Happ, M. B. (2016). Think precarity, not frailty in care for older people. Geriatric Nursing, 37(3), 235-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2016.04.014
Hurd, L. C. (1999). “We're not old!”: Older women's negotiation of aging and oldness. Journal of Aging Studies, 13(4), 419-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-4065(99)00019-5
Kolářová, K. (2015). ‘grandpa lives in paradise now’: biological precarity and the global economy of debility. Feminist Review, 111(1), 75-87. https://doi.org/10.1057/fr.2015.45
McGann, M., Kimberley, H., Bowman, D., & Biggs, S. (2016). The Netherworld between Work and Retirement. Social Policy and Society, 15(4), 625-636. https://doi.org/10.1017/S147474641600021X
Oris, M., Gabriel, R., Ritschard, G., & Kliegel, M. (2017). Long Lives and Old Age Poverty: Social Stratification and Life-Course Institutionalization in Switzerland. Research in Human Development, 14(1), 68-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2016.1268890
Ornellas, A., Engelbrecht, L. K., Martínez-Román, M. A., Tortosa-Martínez, J., Casanova, J. L., & das Dores Guerreiro, M. (2017). Neoliberalism and Austerity in Spain, Portugal and South Africa: The Revolution of Older Persons. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 60(6-7), 535-552. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2017.1324935
Pendall, R., Theodos, B., & Franks, K. (2012). Vulnerable people, precarious housing, and regional resilience: an exploratory analysis. Housing policy debate, 22(2), 271-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2011.648208
Portacolone, E. (2013). The notion of precariousness among older adults living alone in the US. Journal of Aging Studies, 27(2), 166-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2013.01.001
Raymo, J. M., Warren, J. R., Sweeney, M. M., Hauser, R. M., & Ho, J. H. (2011). Precarious employment, bad jobs, labor unions, and early retirement. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 66(2), 249-259. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbq106
37
Sawchuk, K. & Lafontaine, C. (2015). Precarious Ageing: Questioning Access, Creating InterACTion. In P. Dias da Silva & A. Alves (Ed.), TEM 2015: Proceedings of the Technology & Emerging Media Track – Annual Conference of The Canadian Communication Association (Ottawa, June 3–5, 2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20892-3_21
Shuey, K. M., & Willson, A. E. (2017). Trajectories of Work Disability and Economic Insecurity Approaching Retirement. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbx096
Walker, A. (2017). Why the UK Needs a Social Policy on Ageing. Journal of Social Policy, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279417000320
Phase II: Precarity and Immigration
Ahmed, S., Shommu, N. S., Rumana, N., Barron, G. R., Wicklum, S., & Turin, T. C. (2016). Barriers to Access of Primary Healthcare by Immigrant Populations in Canada: A Literature Review. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 18(6), 1522-1540. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10903-015-0276-z
Basavarajappa, K. G. (1999). Distribution, Inequality and Concentration of Income Among Older Immigrants in Canada, 1990 (No. 129). Retrieved from Statistics Canada http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/CS11-0019-129E.pdf
Brown, C., & Henkin, N. (2014). Building Communities for All Ages: Lessons Learned from an Intergenerational Community-building Initiative. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 24(1), 63-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2172
Burr, J. A., Mutchler, J. E., & Gerst, K. (2010). Patterns of Residential Crowding among Hispanics in Later Life: Immigration, Assimilation, and Housing Market Factors. Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 65(6), 772-782. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbq069
Carriere, Y., Martel, L., Légaré, J., & Picard, J. (2016, March 9). The contribution of immigration to the size and ethnocultural diversity of future cohorts of seniors (75-006). Retrieved from Statistics Canada website: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2016001/article/14345-eng.htm
Caxaj S. C, Gill N. K. (2016). Belonging and Mental Wellbeing Among a Rural Indian-Canadian Diaspora: Navigating Tensions in “Finding a Space of Our Own”. Qualitative Health Research. Vol 27, Issue 8, pp. 1119 – 1132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316648129
Ciobanu, R. O., Fokkema, T., & Nedelcu, M. (2016). Ageing as a migrant: vulnerabilities, agency and policy implications. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 43(2), 164-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2016.1238903
Coloma, R. S., & Pino, F. L. (2016). “There’s hardly anything left”: Poverty and the economic insecurity of elderly Filipinos in Toronto. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 48(2), 71-97. https://doi.org/10.1353/ces.2016.0014
Dastjerdi, M., Olson, K., & Ogilvie, L. (2012). A study of Iranian immigrants' experiences of accessing Canadian health care services: a grounded theory. International Journal for Equity in Health, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-11-55
38
Du, Y., & Xu, Q. (2016). Health disparities and delayed health care among older adults in California: a perspective from race, ethnicity, and immigration. Public Health Nursing, 33(5), 383-394. https://doi.org/10.1111/phn.12260
Ferrer, I., Grenier, A., Brotman, S., & Koehn, S. (2017). Understanding the experiences of racialized older people through an intersectional life course perspective. Journal of Aging Studies, 41, 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2017.02.001
Gee, E. M., Kobayashi, K. M., & Prus, S. G. (2004). Examining the healthy immigrant effect in mid- to later life: findings from the Canadian Community Health Survey. Canadian Journal on Aging, 23(Suppl. 1), S61-S69. https://doi.org/10.1353/cja.2005.0032
Grenier, A., Phillipson, C., Rudman, D. L., Hatzifilalithis, S., Kobayashi, K., & Marier, P. (2017a). Precarity in late life: Understanding new forms of risk and insecurity. Journal of Aging Studies, 43, 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2017.08.002
Guruge, S., Thomson, M. S., & Seifi, S. G. (2015). Mental Health and Service Issues Faced by Older Immigrants in Canada: A Scoping Review. Canadian Journal on Aging, 34(4), 431-444. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980815000379
Hochbaum, C. V. (2012). Too Old to Work? The Influence of Retraining on Employment Status for Older Immigrants to Canada. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 44(3), 97-120. https://doi.org/10.1353/ces.2013.0008
Hoopman, R., Terwee, C. B., Muller, M. J., Ory, F., & Aaronson, N. K. (2009). Methodological challenges in quality of life research among Turkish and Moroccan ethnic minority cancer patients: translation, recruitment and ethical issues. Ethnicity & Health, 14(3), 237-253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13557850802398832
Hyman, I. (2004). Setting the Stage: Reviewing Current Knowledge on the Health of Canadian Immigrants: What Is the Evidence and Where Are the Gaps? Canadian Journal of Public Health, 95(3), 14-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03403658
Ip, D., Lui, C. W., & Chui, W. H. (2007). Veiled entrapment:A study of social isolation of older Chinese migrants in Brisbane, Queensland. Ageing and Society, 27(5),719–738. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X07006083
Koehn, S., Habib, S., & Bukhari, S. (2016). S 4 AC Case Study: Enhancing Underserved Seniors’ Access to Health Promotion Programs. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement, 35(1), 89-102. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980815000586
Koehn, S. (2009). Negotiating candidacy: ethnic minority seniors' access to care. Ageing and Society, 29(4), 585-608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X08007952
Koehn, S., Neysmith, S., Kobayashi, K., & Khamisa, H. (2013). Revealing the shape of knowledge using an intersectionality lens: results of a scoping review on the health and health care of ethnocultural minority older adults. Ageing & Society, 33, 437-464. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X12000013
Krause, N., & Bastida, E. (2011). Financial Strain, Religious Involvement, and Life Satisfaction Among Older Mexican Americans. Research on Aging, 33(4), 403-425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027511400433
39
Lahaie, C., Earle, A., & Heymann, J. (2013). An Uneven Burden: Social Disparities in Adult Caregiving Responsibilities, Working Conditions, and Caregiver Outcomes. Research on Aging, 35(3), 243-274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027512446028
Lai, D. W. L., & Surood, S. (2013). Effect of Service Barriers on Health Status of Aging South Asian Immigrants in Calgary, Canada. Health & Social Work, 38(1), 41-50. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/hls065
Lauderdale, D. S., Kuohung, V., Chang, S. L., & Chin, M. H. (2003). Identifying older Chinese immigrants at high risk for osteoporosis. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 18(7), 508-515. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20331.x
Lee, H., & Mason, D. (2015). A Comparative Study of Coping Strategies and Optimism among Korean, Korean-American, and Caucasian American Older Men. Journal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 24(1), 39-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313204.2014.929995
Lee, M. A. (2011). Disparity in disability between native-born non-Hispanic white and foreign-born Asian older adults in the United States: Effects of educational attainment and age at immigration. Social Science & Medicine, 72(8), 1249-1257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.02.020
Lightman, N. & Gingrich, L. G. (2013). The Intersecting Dynamics of Social Exclusion: Age, Gender, Race and Immigrant Status in Canada’s Labour Market. Canadian Ethnic Studies 44(3), 121-145. Canadian Ethnic Studies Association. https://doi.org/10.1353/ces.2013.0010
McDonald, L. (2011). Theorising about ageing, family and immigration. Ageing & Society, 31, 1180-1201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X11000511
McLaren A. T. (2006). Immigration and parental sponsorship in Canada: Implications for elderly women. Canadian Issues, Spring 2006, 34 – 37. Retrieved from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/208685235?pq-origsite=gscholar
Mehta, N. K., Elo, I. T., Engelman, M., Lauderdale, D. S., & Kestenbaum, B. M. (2016). Life Expectancy Among US-born and Foreign-born Older Adults in the United States: Estimates From Linked Social Security and Medicare Data. Demography, 53(4), 1109-1134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-016-0488-4
Mukherjee, A., & Diwan, S. (2016). Late Life Immigration and Quality of Life among Asian Indian Older Adults. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 31(3), 237-253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10823-016-9294-0
Nguyen, D. (2011). Acculturation and perceived mental health need among older Asian immigrants. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 38(4), 526-533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-011-9245-z
Nguyen, D. K., & Maggard-Gibbons, M. (2013). Age, poverty, acculturation, and gastric cancer. Surgery, 154(3), 444-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2013.05.017
Okrainec, K., Booth, G. L., Hollands, S., & Bell, C. M. (2015). Impact of Language Barriers on Complications and Mortality Among Immigrants with Diabetes: A Population-Based Cohort Study. Diabetes Care, 38(2), 189-196. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc14-0801
Paret, M., & Gleeson, S. (2016). Precarity and agency through a migration lens. Citizenship Studies, 20(3-4), 277-294. https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2016.1158356
40
Preston, V., Kim, A., Hudyma, S., Mandell, N., Luxton, M., & Hemphill, J. (2013.) Gender, race and immigration: Aging and economic security in Canada. Canadian Review of Social Policy, 2(68-69), 90-106. Retrieved from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/1370183846?pq-origsite=gscholar
Sharma, K., & Kemp, C. L. (2012). "One should follow the wind": Individualized filial piety and support exchanges in Indian immigrant families in the United States. Journal of Aging Studies, 26(2), 129-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2011.10.003
Shemirani, F. S., & O'Connor, D. L. (2006). Aging in a foreign country: voices of Iranian women aging in Canada. Journal of Women and Aging, 18(2), 73-90. https://doi.org/10.1300/J074v18n02_06
Shor, E., Roelfs, D., & Vang, Z. M. (2017). The "Hispanic mortality paradox" revisited: Meta-analysis and meta-regression of life-course differentials in Latin American and Caribbean immigrants' mortality. Social Science & Medicine, 186, 20-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.05.049
Sohn, L., & Harada, N. D. (2004). Time since immigration and health services utilization of Korean‐American older adults living in Los Angeles County. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52(11), 1946-1950. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52524.x
Sorkin, D. H., & Quyen, N. M. (2014). The Unique Health Status and Health Care Experiences of Older Asian Americans: Research Findings and Treatment Recommendations. Clinical Gerontologist, 37(1), 18-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317115.2013.847513
Syed, M. A., McDonald, L., Smirle, C., Lau, K., Mirza, R. M., & Hitzig, S. L. (2017). Social isolation in Chinese older adults: scoping review for age-friendly community planning. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement, 36(2), 223-245. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980817000101
Taylor, R. J., Forsythe-Brown, I., Lincoln, K. D., & Chatters, L. M. (2017). Extended Family Support Networks of Caribbean Black Adults in the United States. Journal of Family Issues, 38(4), 522-546. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X15573868
VanderPlaat, M., Ramos, H., & Yoshida, Y. (2012). What do Sponsored Parents and Grandparents Contribute? Canadian Ethnic Studies, 44(3), 79-96. https://doi.org/10.1353/ces.2013.0006
Wakabayashi, C. (2010). Effects of Immigration and Age on Health of Older People in the United States. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 29(6), 697-719. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464809353602
Wilson, F. A., Wang, Y., & Stimpson, J. P. (2015). Do Immigrants Underutilize Optometry Services? Optometry and Vision Science, 92(11), 1113-1119. https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000000710
Woo, H., & Zajacova, A. (2017). Predictive Strength of Self-Rated Health for Mortality Risk Among Older Adults in the United States: Does It Differ by Race and Ethnicity? Research on Aging, 39(7), 879-905. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027516637410
Woodward, A. T., Taylor, R. J., Abelson, J. M., & Matusko, N. (2013). Major depressive disorder among older African Americans, Caribbean blacks, and non‐Hispanic
41
whites: secondary analysis of the national survey of American life. Depression and anxiety, 30(6), 589-597. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22041
Wu, Y. N., Triplett, R., & Sun, I. Y. (2012). Chinese immigrants' contact with police. Policing-an International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 35(4), 741-760. https://doi.org/10.1108/13639511211275634
Wu, Z., & Penning, M. (2015). Immigration and loneliness in later life. Ageing & Society, 35(1), 64-95. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X13000470
Phase II: Precarity and Disability
Ansello, E., & O'Neill, P. (2010). Abuse, neglect, and exploitation: considerations in aging with lifelong disabilities. Journal Of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 22(1/2), 105-130. https://doi.org/10.1080/08946560903436395
Bates, K., Goodley, D., & Runswick-Cole, K. (2017). Precarious lives and resistant possibilities: the labour of people with learning disabilities in times of austerity. Disability & Society, 32(2), 160-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2017.1281105
Biggs, Simon, Carr, Haapala, (2015) Work, Aging and Risks to family life: the case of Australia. Canadian Journal on Aging 34, (3) (09): 321-330. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980815000185
Brocklehurst, H., & Laurenson, M. (2008). A concept analysis examining the vulnerability of older people. British Journal of Nursing, 17(21), 1354-1357. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2008.17.21.31738
Casas-Cortés, M. (2014). A genealogy of precarity: A toolbox for rearticulating fragmented social realities in and out of the workplace. Rethinking Marxism, 26(2), 206-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/08935696.2014.888849
Craciun, C., & Flick, U. (2014). “I will never be the granny with rosy cheeks”: Perceptions of aging in precarious and financially secure middle-aged Germans. Journal of aging studies, 29, 78-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2014.01.003
Dumas, A., Savage, M., & Stuart, S. (2014). Anti-normative lifestyles in cardiac rehabilitation: Underpriviledged men’s post-heart incident lives. Health, 18(5), 458-475. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363459313507587
Freedman. V. (2014) Research gaps in the demography of aging with disability Disability and Health Journal, Volume 7, Issue 1, S60 - S63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2013.04.009
Furlotte, C., Schwartz, K., Koornstra, J. J., & Naster, R. (2012). ‘Got a room for me?’ Housing experiences of older adults living with HIV/AIDS in Ottawa. Canadian Journal of Aging, 31(1), 37-48. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980811000584
Gannon, B., & Munley, M. (2009). Age and disability: Explaining the wage differential. Social Science & Medicine, 69(1), 47-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.04.013
Gilleard, C., & Higgs, P. (2011). Frailty, disability and old age: A re-appraisal. Health:, 15(5), 475-490.Goods, N., & Millsteed, J. (2016). Understanding retirement for ageing adults with a disability in supported employment. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 79(11), 713-721. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308022616662051
42
Grassman, E., Holme, L., Taghizadeh Larsson, A., & Whitaker, A. (2012). A long life with a particular signature: life course and aging for people with disabilities. Journal of gerontological social work, 55(2), 95-111. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2011.633975
Grenier, A. (2005) The contextual and social locations of older women’s experiences with disability and decline. Journal of Aging Studies. 19(2), 131-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2004.07.003
Grenier, A., Phillipson, C., Rudman, D. L., Hatzifilalithis, S., Kobayashi, K., & Marier, P. (2017a). Precarity in late life: Understanding new forms of risk and insecurity. Journal of Aging Studies, 43, 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2017.08.002
Grenier, A., Llyod, L., & Phillipson, C. (2017b). Precarity in late life: Rethinking dementia as a ‘frailed’ old age. Sociology of Health & Illness, 39(2), 318-330. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12476
Grøn, L. (2016). Old age and vulnerability between first, second and third person perspectives. ethnographic explorations of aging in contemporary Denmark. Journal of Aging Studies, 39, 21-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2016.09.002
Happ, M. B. (2016). Think precarity, not frailty in care for older people. Geriatric Nursing, 37, 235-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2016.04.014
Harris, K., & Scully, B. (2015). A hidden counter-movement? precarity, politics, and social protection before and beyond the neoliberal era. Theory and Society, 44(5), 415-444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-015-9256-5
Kalleberg, A. L. (2009). Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400101
Knight. A. (2015) Disability as Vulnerability: Redistributing Precariousness in Democratic Ways. The Journal of Politics (76) 1. Pp. 15-26. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381613001266
Lid, I. M. (2015). Vulnerability and disability: A citizenship perspective. Disability & Society, 30(10), 1554-1567. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2015.1113162
Miller, N. A., Kirk, A., Alston, B., & Glos, L. (2014). Effects of gender, disability, and age in the receipt of preventive services. The Gerontologist, 54(3), 473-487. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnt012
Moor, J. A., de Graaf, P. M., & Komter, A. (2013). Family, welfare state generosity and the vulnerability of older adults: A cross-national study. Journal of Aging Studies, 27(4), 347-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2013.07.002
Moss, P. (1997). Negotiating spaces in home environments: Older women living with arthritis. Social Science & Medicine, 45(1), 23-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(96)00305-X
Naylor, M. D., Kurtzman, E. T., Grabowski, D. C., Harrington, C., McClellan, M., & Reinhard, S. C. (2012). Unintended Consequences Of Steps To Cut Readmissions And Reform Payment May Threaten Care Of Vulnerable Older Adults. Health Affairs, 31(7), 1623-1632. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2012.0110
Nicholson, C., Meyer, J, Flatley, M., Holman, C., & Lowton, K. (2012). Living on the margin: Understanding the experience of living and dying with frailty in old age.
43
Social Science and Medicine, 75(8), 1426-1432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.06.011
Ouvrard, C., Meillon, C., Dartigues, J., Ávila-Funes, J. A., & Amieva, H. (2016). Psychosocioeconomic precariousness, cognitive decline and risk of developing dementia: A 25-year study. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 41(3-4), 137-145. https://doi.org/10.1159/000443790
Portacolone, E. (2013). The notion of precariousness among older adults living alone in the US. Journal of Aging Studies, 27(2), 166-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2013.01.001
Putnam, M. (2012). Can aging with disability find a home in gerontological social work? Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 55(2), 91-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2012.647581
Riach, K., & Loretto, W. (2009). Identity work and the unemployed 'worker’: age, disability and the lived experience of the older unemployed. Work, Employment and Society, 23(1), 102-119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017008099780
Robinson, L. M., Dauenhauer, J., Bishop, K. M., & Baxter, J. (2012). Growing Health Disparities for Persons Who Are Aging with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities: The Social Work Linchpin. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 55(2), 175-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2011.644030
Rosati, R. J., Russell, D., Peng, T., Brickner, C., Kurowski, D., Christopher, M. A., & Sheehan, K. M. (2014). Medicare Home Health Payment Reform May Jeopardize Access for Clinically Complex and Socially Vulnerable Patients. Health Affairs, 33(6), 946-956. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2013.1159
Sarvimaki, A., & Stenbock-Hult, B. (2016). The meaning of vulnerability to older persons. Nursing Ethics, 23(4), 372-383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733014564908
Sheen, V. (2017). The implications of Australian women’s precarious employment for the later pension age. The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 28(1), 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1035304617690095
Shildrick, M. (2015). Living on; not getting better. feminist review, 111(1), 10-24. https://doi.org/10.1057/fr.2015.22
Szanton, S., Seplaki, C., Thorpe RJ, J., Allen, J., & Fried, L. (2010). Socioeconomic status is associated with frailty: The Women's Health and Aging Studies. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 64(1), 63-67. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2008.078428
van der Meide, H., Olthuis, G., & Leget, C. (2015). Feeling an outsider left in uncertainty–a phenomenological study on the experiences of older hospital patients. Scandinavian journal of caring sciences, 29(3), 528-536. https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.12187
Weeks, L., & LeBlanc, K. (2010). Housing concerns of vulnerable older Canadians. Canadian Journal On Aging, 29(3), 333-347. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980810000310
Endnotes
i The use of the term ‘im/migrant’ captures the experience of migration across borders by choice (e.g., skilled workers or business immigrants under the economic category) or circumstance (e.g., seeking asylum as refugees or illegally to escape violence and/or persecution). Im/migrant also captures the experience of migration by immigrants and refugees across borders within countries of settlement (e.g., from one city to another within a province or across provincial borders). ii Purposes for conducting a scoping review include: to identify the types of available evidence in a given field; to clarify key concepts/ definitions in the literature; to examine how research is conducted on a certain topic or field; to identify key characteristics or factors related to a concept; as a precursor to a systematic review; and to identify and analyse knowledge gaps (Heyn, Meeks, & Pruchno, 2019)iii Note that our scoping study did not involve the optional 6th stage of public or stakeholder consultation that is articulated in the Arksey and O’Malley framework. This review is part of a larger ethnographic study on precarity which involves stakeholder interviews as the next step.iv After careful reading, remaining articles were further eliminated due to that they were a book or book chapter; did not address one or more key concept(s) and/or their intersection (e.g. aging/older people or precarity/vulnerability) did not address key concept(s) within the scope of the study (may include key terms but not in a way defined by the scope of the study (e.g. more individualized/biomedical conceptualization of vulnerability/precarity).v Note that in the applied health sciences, the term content analysis and thematic tend to be used to refer to the process of qualitative analysis. Given that this study follows a scoping review methodology, we take a pragmatic approach of employing the language of this sub-discipline, whereby content and thematic analysis are used to convey themes to an audience that are more accustomed to quantitative methods (see Aronson 1995; Braun et al, 2018). vi Note that this search strategy was devised based on poor results of a combined word search in the titles (ie. Aging AND precarity AND Im/migration terms). Although more cumbersome as a process, this ensured that the search was a comprehensive as possible. vii Note that many of the articles reviewed had content that crossed themes. The reported numbers thus do not sum to total articles found (51). viii Here, we draw on Miller’s articulation of three uses of precarity as a condition, category, and experience as an attempt to classify precarity, aging, and im/migration.ix Many texts outlined concepts and location that fed into several of these themes, and thus the numbers reported in this section do not sum to 39.x Again, here we draw on Millar’s three uses of precarity (a condition, category and experience) in an attempt to categorize the use of precarity, aging, and disability.xiPreliminary differences between concepts can be identified. Risk was used to explain the kinds of circumstances which lead to a particular experience. For example, women’s part-time and poorly paid work were used to explain the gendered dimension of precarity and the structured problems of pension policy. Vulnerability was used to describe occupation segregation, differential pay rates, feminization of labor, and the lack of “good” well-paying jobs available to women as well as to highlight disparities and disproportionate rates of factors such as premature workforce exit. Insecurity was often used to refer to financial insecurity related to pension and low income in late life.
