Journal of Population Ageing

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 11–23 | Cite as

Population Ageing, the Intergenerational Conflict, and Active Ageing Policies – a Multilevel Study of 27 European Countries

  • Moritz HessEmail author
  • Elias Nauman
  • Leander Steinkopf


In the scientific and the public debate demographic ageing is sometimes perceived as an unstoppable “grey tide” which will inevitably lead to a conflict between the old and young generation. In this paper we empirically evaluate whether we find any evidence for an intergenerational conflict in Europe and which factors might influence its severity. In particular, we answer the following questions. (1) Is there a conflict between the interests of the younger and the older generation? (2) Does the strength of the conflict increase with population ageing? And finally, (3) can a policy of Active Ageing, i.e. better integrating older generations into society, moderate the conflict? We answer these questions in a comparative study of 27 European countries using data from the Eurobarometer 2009. Our results show a moderate conflict between generations. Compared to spending preferences of the younger generation, older people are more likely to support increased spending for old age at the expense of educational spending. Contrary to expectation, generational conflict does not increase with population ageing. Linking country differences in the strength of the generational conflict to the degree of population ageing with multilevel regression techniques we do not find any evidence that the conflict is increasing In a final step of our analysis we evaluate the potential of generational policies - measured with the Active Aging Index - to mitigate the generational conflict. Intergenerational conflict is weaker when older people actively participate in the political life and are visible in society, suggesting Active Aging policies as a means to mitigate intergenerational conflict


Intergenerational conflict Active aging AAI Ageing societies Pension policies Eurobarometer 

Supplementary material

12062_2016_9161_MOESM1_ESM.docx (50 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 50 kb)


  1. Berry, C. (2014). Young people and the ageing electorate: breaking the unwritten rule of representative democracy. Parliamentary Affairs, 67(3), 708–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bonoli, G., & Häusermann, S. (2009). Who wants what from the welfare state? European Societies, 11(2), 211–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Busemeyer, M. R., Goerres, A., & Weschle, S. (2009). Attitudes towards redistributive spending in an era of demographic ageing: the rival pressures from age and income in 14 OECD countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 19(3), 195–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D'Addio, A. C., Keese, M., & Whitehouse, E. (2010). Population ageing and labour markets. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 26(4), 613–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Emery, T. (2012). Intergenerational conflict: evidence from Europe. Journal of Population Ageing, 5(1), 7–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Esping-Andersen, G., & Sarasa, S. (2002). The generational conflict reconsidered. Journal of European Social Policy, 12(1), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. European Commission (2009): The 2009 Ageing Report: economic and budgetary projection for the EU-27 Member States (2008–2060). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  8. Eurostat (2015): The EU in the World. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  9. Fong, C. M., Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2005). Reciprocity and the welfare state. In H. Gintis (Ed.), Moral sentiments and material interests. The foundations of cooperation in economic life (pp. 277–302). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Goerres, A. (2008). Reforming the Welfare state in times of grey majorities: the myth of an oppositin between younger and older voters in Germany. German Policy Studies 4(3):131--156.Google Scholar
  11. Goerres, A., & Prinzen, K. (2012). Using mixed methods for the analysis of individuals. A review of necessary and sufficient conditions and an application to welfare state attitudes. Quality & Quantity, 46, 415–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goerres, A., & Tepe, M. (2010). Age-based self-interest, intergenerational solidarity and the welfare state: a comparative analysis of older people's attitudes towards public childcare in 12 OECD countries. European Journal of Political Research, 49(6), 818–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hofäcker, D., Hess, M., & Naumann, E. (2015). Changing retirement transitions in times of paradigmatic political change: towards growing inequalities? In C. Torp (Ed.), Challenges of aging: retirement, pensions, and intergenerational justice (pp. 205–226). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hox, J. J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: techniques and applications. New York. NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Iversen, T., & Soskice, D. (2001). An asset theory of social policy preferences. American Political Science Review, 95, 875–893.Google Scholar
  16. Jaeger, M. M. (2013). The effect of macroeconomic and social conditions on the demand for redistribution: A pseudo panel approach. Journal of European Social Policy, 23(2), 149--163.Google Scholar
  17. Keck, W., & Blome, A. (2008). Is there generational cleavage in Europe?: age-specific perceptions of elderly care and of the pension system. In J. Alber, T. Fahey, & C. Saraceno (Eds.), Handbook of quality of life (pp. 73–99). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Kinder, D. R., & Kiewiet, D. R. (1981). Sociotropic politics: the American case. British Journal of Political Science, 11(02), 129–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kohli, M. & Kühnemund, H. (2005): Die zweite Lebenshälfte. Gesellschaftliche Lage und Partizipation im Spiegel des Alters-Survey. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  20. Kotlikoff, J., & Burns, S. (2004). The Coming of a Storm. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lain, D. & Vickerstaff, S. (2014): Working beyond retirement age: lessons for policy. In Harper, S., & Hamblin, K. (Eds.). (2014). International handbook on ageing and public policy (pp. 242–255). Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. Luttmer, E. F. P., & Singhal, M. (2011). Culture, context, and the taste for redistribution. American Economic Journal-Economic Policy, 3(1), 157–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mau, S. (2004). The moral economy of welfare states: Britain and Germany compared. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mau, S., & Veghte, B. (2007). Social justice, legitimacy and the welfare state. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  25. Mehlkop, G., & Neumann, R. (2012). The explanation of preferences for family benefits. Empirical evidence of the interplay between rational choice and attitudes towards family and children. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 41(3), 182–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moody, H. R. (2006). Aging: concepts and controversies. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press.Google Scholar
  27. Naumann, E. (2014a): Raising the retirement age: retrenchment, feedback and attitudes. In Kumlin, S. & Stadelmann-Steffen, I. (Eds.). How welfare states shape the democratic public: policy feedback, participation, voting and attitudes (pp. 223–243). Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  28. Naumann, E. (2014b). Increasing conflict in times of retrenchment? Attitudes towards healthcare provision in Europe between 1996 and 2002. International Journal of Social Welfare, 23, 276–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Naumann, E. (2016). Do increasing reform pressures change welfare state preferences? An experimental study on population ageing, pension reform preferences, political knowledge and ideology. Ageing& Society. doi: 10.1017/ S0144686X15001129.Google Scholar
  30. OECD. (2011): Pensions at a Glance 2011: Retirement-income Systems in OECD and G20 Countries. OECD.Google Scholar
  31. Pierson, P. (2001). The new politics of the welfare state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sachweh, P. (2012). The moral economy of inequality. Popular views on income differentiation, poverty, and wealth. Socio-Economic Review, 10(3), 419–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Street, D., & Cossman, J. (2006). Greatest generation or greedy geezers? Social spending preferences and the elderly. Social Problems, 53(1), 75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Svallfors, S. (1997). Worlds of welfare and attitudes to redistribution: a comparison of eight western nations. European Sociological Review, 13(3), 283–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Svallfors, S. (2008). The generational contract in Sweden: age-specific attitudes to age-related policies. Policy and Politics, 36(3), 381–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tepe, M., & Vanhuysse, P. (2009). Are aging OECD welfare states on the path to gerontocracy? Evidence from 18 democracies, 1980–2002. Journal of Public Policy, 29(1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Walker, A., & Maltby, T. (2012). Active ageing: a strategic policy solution to demographic ageing in the European Union. International Journal of Social Welfare, 21, 117–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wendt, C., Mischke, M., & Pfeifer, M. (2011). Welfare states and public opinion: perceptions of healthcare systems, family policy and benefits for the unemployed and poor in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wilke, C., & Börsch-Supan, A. (2009). Zur mittel- und langfristigen Entwicklung der Erwerbstätigkeit in Deutschland. Zeitschrift für Arbeitsmarktforschung, 41(1), 29–48.Google Scholar
  40. Wlezien, C. (1995). The public as thermostat - dynamics of preferences for spending. American Journal of Political Science, 39(4), 981–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zaidi, A., Gasior, K., Hofmarcher, M., Lelkes, O., Marin, B., Rodrigues, R., Schmidt, A., Vanhuysse, P., & Zolyomi, E. (2012). Active ageing index 2012: concept, methodology and final results. Vienna: European Centre Vienna.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of GerontologyTechnical University of DortmundDortmundGermany
  2. 2.Collaborative Research Centre “The Political Economy of Reforms”University MannheimMannheimGermany
  3. 3.Cluster of Excellence: Languages of EmotionsFree University Berlin, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Institute for Medical PsychologyMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations