First study, then work, at the end well-deserved retirement? This model of the phases of human life does not fit with reality. Social sciences have recognized this for a long time. It is time for them to be followed by the world of politics, but most of all - each of us. Find out what Aging 4.0 is.

Contents:

  1. Aging 4.0 - what does it mean?
  2. Aging 4.0 - not only study, work, retirement
  3. Aging 4.0 - now it's time for …?
  4. Aging 3.0, the starting point
  5. Aging 4.0, i.e. the reaching point
  6. Aging 4.0 will not come soon

The increase in life expectancy results in a number of new challenges for the social policy in the field of older people. Truism? In the study en titled Aging 4.0: Towards an Integrated Life-Course Approach to Population Aging. Kai Leichsenring1 discusses the lesser-discussed consequences of this process.

The most important of them is undoubtedly the need to reject the common thought pattern that assumes the existence of three periods of human life, one after the other in a fixed order: school education in childhood and early youth, paid work in late youth and adulthood, and finally the stage of inactivity in old age.

Aging 4.0 - what does it mean?

The Aging 4.0 label, which Kai Leichsenring provided his approach to the phases of human life, aims to show the fundamental relationship of this concept with social and social challenges analyzed together under the names "Industry 4.0" or "Work 4.0 "(Work 4.0), so in relation to the ongoing fourth industrial revolution.

In the light of the study, the most important elements of this revolution are changes in the demand for qualifications, in the organization of work, in the quality of work, and in the relationship between technology and people.

The author proposes taking political actions that will not only answer new challenges or needs of the business world, but also allow to use the enormous potential of increasing life expectancy - for the benefit of both the individual and the society.

The name Aging 4.0 in terms of Leichsenring also points to the ongoing fourth stage of changes inperception of old age - from perceiving old age as a social issue and the establishment of the first pension insurance systems around 1870 (Aging 1.0), through the popularization of pension systems with an increase in the average life expectancy of a human being to 65 - around 1950 (Aging 2.0) and the development of the activity of seniors and the introduction of the concept of lifelong learning - around 1980 (Aging 3.0), to the postulated integrated approach to the phases of human life with the percentage of people aged 65+ in the society at the level of 18% - around 2022 (Aging 4.0).

Aging 4.0 - not only study, work, retirement

Leichsenring points out that even the catalog of these activities is untrue, as it ignores the important aspect of caring for loved ones. Regardless of the fact that maternity leave or (recently in Poland) also "paternity leave" in the social insurance system are included in the period of work, this activity is completely different than gainful employment.

The same applies to the need to care for elderly parents, a sick spouse or child, brother or sister (regardless of age) with a significant disability.

There are of course an infinite number of possible life scenarios, but the most common (even if not personal) experience of maternity or parental leave shows that the model of the three phases of human life is theoretical and constitutes too far-reaching generalization. Probably - although Kai Leichsenring does not write about it - this way of thinking is a relic of patriarchalism, which for a long time did not perceive the tasks (including caring ones) stereotypically belonging to wives, mothers, aunts, daughters or grandmothers. Those who today are referred to as the invisible work of women.

Aging 4.0 - now it's time for …?

The author also points out that it is also fundamentally wrong to link particular types of human activity with a specific age. To find out about it, as in the case of general key spheres of human activity, it is enough to refer to common experiences.

Of course - compulsory schooling basically covers children of the same age (if you leave aside the confusion with 6-year-olds in Polish schools). However, later choices of the educational path lead to a significant diversification, regardless of the obligation to study until the age of 18 (and also regardless of the ongoing changes in the education system related to the return to 8-year primary school).

19-year-old may just start working after graduating from high school or after leaving school, he may also start studieshigher, calculated for 3, 5 or 8 years (if you include third-cycle studies, i.e. doctorate - more and more popular, among others due to the general tendency to extend the period of education), but also only to prepare for the final exams, e.g. in high school with linguistics class "zero".

Further, even more individualized shifts in age frames may result from breaks in education caused by diseases, temporary unemployment, diversified career paths or the need to retrain or supplement education.

An important role, especially in the case of women, is also played by the decision to give birth and raise (or not) a certain number of children. This type of challenges affecting the activity cycle in human life is particularly visible in the so-called the sandwich generation, i.e. in people who are forced to combine parenthood with engaging care for their own parents, who are aging or chronically ill.

Someone might ask at this point: but why would the individual choices mentioned here be problematic in view of the existing model? The answer is: mainly due to the linking of important rights (including student or student allowances or retirement benefits) with a certain age, and then - due to the social climate, which is still not conducive to the individualisation of one's own education and work process; also in Poland, which in our country is also largely due to financial issues).

Aging 3.0, the starting point

Kai Leichsenring describes our era in an interesting way, which - as has already been mentioned - has been labeled Aging 3.0. Points out that between 1980 and now, attempts were made to adapt social security systems to the challenges of extending human life (which translates into higher average amounts paid as per capita pensions) and the aging of societies (as a result in redistributive systems , such as Poland, fewer and fewer contribution payers are working for pensions of an increasing number of benefit recipients).

The World He alth Organization called for investments in solutions aimed at maintaining the general well-being of citizens, so as to maximize the period of full fitness of aging people, which would largely exempt state institutions from providing them with care.

Governments of individual countries, including Poland, have so far focused on the issue of raising the retirement age and encouraging individual postponing of retirement in capital systems, which, with low earnings of many inhabitants of our country for decadessounded and still sounds like a grim joke.

The discussed approach of the political class to the increase in life expectancy and the aging of societies reinforces the still widespread perception of the existence of three constant phases of human life and the linkage of these phases with specific age frames.

This state of affairs results in both inconvenience (e.g. no atmosphere for retraining in the fifth or sixth decade of life) and inequalities (e.g. depending on the number of calendar years worked and the total age of , which discriminates against people who started work extremely early).

Lifelong learning programs, postulated since the 1980s, were to become a cure for the problems presented here. Such an offer would be attractive not only to older people who want (or are forced) to supplement, develop or change their professional competences.

It was also supposed to be used by e.g. mothers after several years of parental leave or long-term unemployed. The statistics cited by Leichsenring prove that only 15% of people aged 25-65 use this type of program in the European Union countries.

Aging 4.0, i.e. the reaching point

The considerations presented by Leichsenring lead to a fundamental conclusion. It is a postulate of a change in the perception of formal education, work, raising children, caring for loved ones and free time - considering these spheres of human activity without identifying with a specific age and without the (generally silent) assumption that these spheres form a cyclical system of a constant order .

Interestingly, the researcher indicates that a similar view was presented already in the 1970s by a pair of distinguished American gerontologists, Matilda White Riley and John Riley. He also points out that the extremely dynamic technological development in our era demands more than before, even forces a change of perspective, if only due to the need for people to adapt to the rapidly evolving environment.

He also calls for a realistic perception of the course of human life at all levels, from political activities (e.g. facilitating the use of education or care services, regardless of age) through the practice of business operations (e.g. programs preventing discrimination against age in the workplace) after - and here the key thing - perception and planning of one's own life activity.

As a result, a new model of the human life cycle is to be created, integrated, i.e. free from breaking into predefined stages and solidaristic, i.e. related to systemicfacilitating the transition between the spheres of paid and unpaid work, education, family responsibilities, and free time.

This solidarity would also result in a more even distribution of the fruits of technological development and economic growth - income, time, life chances. This is especially important in the era when the largest international corporations turn out to create structures stronger than those of democratic states of law.

According to Leichsenring, social solidarity, based on support programs and the social security system, is an indispensable element in this model of human life; it is about, for example, financial benefits and programs for supplementing professional competences, thanks to which people who suspend their careers due to the need to care for their relatives will not be afraid of returning to the labor market.

On the other hand, incorporating this model in one's own life is a prerequisite for successfully overcoming professional, family and personal challenges.

Aging 4.0 will not come soon

How does the researcher imagine solutions that would fulfill the concept of Aging 4.0? Leichsenring presents three postulates. First of all, regular periods of supplementing (or changing) qualifications - every 10 or 15 years, supported by guaranteed income during the education period.

Second, solutions to alleviate the gender imbalance in the area of ​​unpaid work; here, among others care leave, guaranteed income and flexible jobs (e.g. shared between two people; not "flexible forms of employment" such as the infamous "junk contracts").

Finally - advanced systems of contacting people with specific professional competences with employers looking for these competences and vice versa, so as to effectively use the potential of all employees, regardless of gender and age.

Is it real? The implementation of this concept would require, inter alia, a thorough reconstruction of the social insurance system (pensions) and social security (other benefits), based after all on the foundation of the traditional model of human life phases, with a retirement pension as a reward for years of service. The changes would also have to cover the education system, so far unequivocally oriented towards young people and not without friction accepting the rest - especially the older and "non-digital" ones.

The transition to the Aging 4.0 phase would also require the creation of a rich offer of support, from training or mentoring to financial benefits, enabling functioning during periods off from work.

Such powerful social changes cannot be introduced overnight, or even within a few years.After all, we are talking not only about the reconstruction of the structure of public spending, the education system and the labor market, but most of all about the perception of human life in a new way - free from the existing stereotypes.

Nevertheless, we must recognize the facts - the increase in life expectancy, the aging of societies and the ever-accelerating development of technology, significantly affecting the labor market - and then address these facts. How? By respecting the freedom of every human being in drawing their own way of life and building a new, perhaps going further than ever before, social solidarity.

Such a wide range of social changes - from the perception of human life in new categories to the necessary consensus in the reconstruction of the structure of public expenditure, the education system and the national labor market - is impossible to implement overnight, or even within a few years.

The increase in life expectancy is a fact, however, as is the increasingly faster technological progress, causing significant changes in the labor market. One way or another one will have to refer to these phenomena.

The best way is to consciously respect human freedom in shaping one's own life path and, at the same time, in the spirit of social solidarity, perhaps going further than ever before.

About the authorPaweł DombrowskiPolitical scientist, graduate of interdisciplinary political science and sociology studies in the field of social policy (Faculty of Journalism and Political Science, University of Warsaw). In journalism, he deals mainly with the broadly understood subject of gerontology.

Read more articles from this author

Category:

Geriatrics