The impact of reducing formal care benefits on caregivers’ well-being: evidence from Japan

Rong Fu (), Dung Duc Le and Yoko Ibuka
Additional contact information
Rong Fu: Waseda University
Dung Duc Le: Keio University
Yoko Ibuka: Keio University

Review of Economics of the Household, 2025, vol. 23, issue 4, No 3, 1249 pages

Abstract: Abstract This study examines the impact of reducing formal care benefits on the well-being of informal caregivers, contributing to the ongoing discourse about establishing sustainable and adequate levels of formal care. We utilize a reform introduced in Japan’s public long-term care insurance system, which curtailed formal care benefits for a group of recipients with low care needs. Employing a difference-in-difference approach with fixed effects on a nationally representative sample of coresident informal caregivers, we explore both the overall and temporal effects of this reform. Our findings reveal that the reform had an adverse impact on caregivers’ physical well-being, leading to diminished mobility and stability. The impact on caregivers’ mental well-being was less clear, reflecting a competing influence of stress and the psychological rewards associated with caregiving. The decline in physical well-being endured over time, while the effects on mental well-being were transient. Additionally, female caregivers exhibited greater vulnerability compared to their male counterparts, experiencing more significant deterioration in both physical and mental well-being. Alarmingly, the reform also negatively influenced the well-being of care recipients, suggesting that reducing formal care benefits does not yield positive outcomes for either caregivers or recipients. This study underscores the necessity of accounting for caregivers’ well-being when evaluating the cost-effectiveness of reducing formal care benefits and advocates for policies aimed at safeguarding female caregivers from health and financial challenges.

Keywords: Formal long-term care; Informal caregivers; Well-being; Difference-in-difference; Event study; I14; I18; I31; I38 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11150-024-09699-5 Abstract (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:kap:reveho:v:23:y:2025:i:4:d:10.1007_s11150-024-09699-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/11150/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s11150-024-09699-5

Access Statistics for this article

Review of Economics of the Household is currently edited by Shoshana Grossbard

More articles in Review of Economics of the Household from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().