Who volunteers and why? Understanding the role of resources and motivations in
participation in voluntary work
Niebuur, Jacobien
DOI:
10.33612/diss.133869314
IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from
it. Please check the document version below.
Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Publication date:
2020
Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database
Citation for published version (APA):
Niebuur, J. (2020). Who volunteers and why? Understanding the role of resources and motivations in
participation in voluntary work. University of Groningen. https://doi.org/10.33612/diss.133869314
Copyright
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
Take-down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
1
135747_Jacobien_Niebuur_BNW-def.indd 11
This dissertation studies the antecedents of volunteering in later life, and improves our understanding of the role of individual resources and volunteer motivations in participation in voluntary work. The first part of this thesis is devoted to the study of individual factors associated with participation in voluntary work over the life course. In the second part, the role of volunteer motivations in participation in voluntary work in later life is studied. In this introduction, I will first provide information on the age-related prevalence of societal participation (including voluntary work) among the Dutch older general population. Next, voluntary work, which is the central topic of interest of this dissertation, is discussed in terms of its definition and prevalence. Moreover, the societal relevance of participation in voluntary work is highlighted. Subsequently, I will address the overall aim of this dissertation along with the research questions that are examined. Furthermore, an overview of the data sources used in the studies included in this dissertation is provided. Finally, the outline of the dissertation is presented, including a short description of the research questions addressed in each chapter.
SOCIETAL PARTICIPATION IN LATER LIFE
Older adults participate in a range of societal activities, including the provision of informal care, volunteering, enrollment in education, caretaking of grandchildren, and paid work. Of all individuals aged 55 and over in the Netherlands in 2012, 22 percent provided informal care, 25 percent participated in paid work, and 31 percent participated in voluntary work1. Participation rates in societal activities in later life
decline with age1. The participation rate for paid work decreases from 68 percent
among people aged 55 to 60 to 38 percent among people aged 60 to 651. Although
participation rates in voluntary work and informal care in later life also decline with age, they decline both more slowly and later in life than participation rates in paid work. Participation rates in informal care decline gradually from 28 percent among individuals aged 55 to 60 to 15 percent among older individuals (aged 75 and over). Participation rates in voluntary work remain stable between the ages of 55 and 70 (around 35 percent), followed by a decline to 31 percent among people aged 70 to 75, and finally drop to 17 percent among people aged 75 and over. Participation of older people in informal care, voluntary work and paid work has increased substantially in the past decades1. Among people aged 60 to 65 years, the participation rate in paid
work has even tripled compared to twenty years ago, and an increasing proportion of people aged 65 and over is willing and able to continue participation in paid work1.
1
In the past decades, participation in voluntary work has increased especially among adults aged 51-642.
In Figure 1, the age-related prevalence of societal participation among Dutch individuals aged 60 to 80 participating in the Lifelines Cohort Study, is presented. At the age of 60, almost 80 percent of the individuals still participate in paid work, but this percentage declines steeply between ages 60 and 67, when the large majority of the individuals has retired. At the same time, participation rates in voluntary work and caretaking of grandchildren increase. As the figure shows, participation in voluntary work and caretaking of grandchildren are the most important societal activities for individuals aged 65 years and over. Caretaking of grandchildren has the highest prevalence between ages 60 and 70, and declines steeply thereafter. Participation rates in voluntary work only decline after the age of 75, but remain relatively high compared to participation rates in other types of societal participation. Voluntary work is thus among the most important types of societal participation for Dutch older adults.
Figure 1 Age-related prevalence of societal participation among participants of the Lifelines Cohort
Study (2017)1
Participation in voluntary work is often combined with participation in other societal activities. In Figure 2, all combinations of societal activities among Dutch volunteering individuals aged 60 to 80 participating in the Lifelines Cohort Study are presented. About one-fifth (18.9%) of the volunteering individuals aged 60 to 80 participates in voluntary work only. A substantial percentage of older adults combines voluntary work with one other societal activity such as caretaking of grandchildren (30.6%), providing informal care (6.9%), or participation in paid work (6.0%). Voluntary work is also quite often combined with multiple other societal activities, such as providing informal care and caretaking of grandchildren (13.9%), or with caretaking of grandchildren and paid work (8.6%).
Figure 2 Combining societal activities among volunteering older individuals (60 – 80 years)
partici-pating in the Lifelines Cohort Study (2017)2.
DEFINITION OF VOLUNTARY WORK
Over the years, many definitions of voluntary work have been used in the literature. Cnaan, Handy & Wadsworth3 synthesized commonly used definitions of volunteering,
ranging from rather specific to more general ones. Key examples of frequently used definitions of volunteering are those proposed by Wilson4 and the International Labor
1
Organization5. According to Wilson4, volunteering means “any activity in which time is
given freely to benefit another person, group, or organization” (p. 215). The International Labor Organization5 describes voluntary work as “unpaid non-compulsory work;
that is, time individuals give without pay to activities performed either through an organization or directly for others outside their own household” (p. 13).
A frequently made distinction within research on volunteering is that between formal and informal volunteering. Within this dissertation, participation in formal voluntary work is studied, that is: “working as an unpaid volunteer for community benefit under the auspices of an organization”6 (p. 29), or “an activity undertaken by an individual
that is uncoerced, unpaid (or with minimal compensation to offset costs), structured by an organization, and directed toward a community concern”7 (p. 461). Formal
volunteering is thus linked to organizations, such as clubs and associations8 and is
distinct from informal volunteering. Informal volunteering is defined as helping others outside an organizational context7, including support within the family or assistance
to neighbors8, and is outside the scope of this dissertation.
Volunteering is often considered as being part of the broader group of productive activities. Productive activities can be defined as “socially valued activities that produce goods or services, whether paid or not”9 (p. 268). Volunteering from the
standpoint of being a productive activity can be defined as “an activity that has a market value greater than any remuneration received” (Smith, 1981 (p.23) in Wilson & Musick10 (p. 694)). Or, similarly, as “an activity that produces goods and services at
below the market rate”4 (p. 216). Morgan (1986) already clarified the concept of unpaid
productive activities: “if someone does not perform it, someone else would have to be paid to do it”9 (p. 268).
Next to being part of the cluster of productive activities, volunteering is also part of a general cluster of helping behaviors, as is the provision of informal care and spontaneous support of others in need. Within the cluster of helping behaviors, volunteering is somewhere in-between spontaneous support (for example helping a victim of an accident) and providing informal care to family or friends. As opposed to providing spontaneous assistance, volunteering as a helping behavior is typically proactive rather than reactive, and requires more commitment of time and effort4.
Volunteering differs from both spontaneous helping and providing care to relatives, especially because volunteerism involves the active choice to help others in need;
the volunteering activities are actively sought by the volunteers themselves, they require commitment and the donation of time and effort11,12. Additionally, volunteering,
in contrast to informal caregiving, is a form of helping that occurs without any bonds or prior obligation or commitment to the recipients of volunteer services11.
VOLUNTEERING IN THE NETHERLANDS IN
CROSS-NATION-AL PERSPECTIVE
The total global formal and informal volunteer workforce is estimated at 109 million full-time equivalent workers (in 2016), of which about 30 percent volunteered formally through an organization, and about 70 percent informally for other individuals13. Yet,
the share of formal volunteering differs substantially across regions worldwide13.
Research on the differences in formal volunteering between countries mainly focused on cross-national differences in the levels of wealth, democracy and the state/economy relationship.14 Rates of formal volunteering tend to be higher
in higher-income countries than in lower-income countries, as a result of the greater concentration of formal voluntary organizations and thus opportunities for volunteering in higher-income countries13. The share of formal volunteering ranges
from only 13 percent of total volunteering activity in Africa, to 38 percent in Asia, the Pacific (Australia, New Zealand) and North America. In Europe, 26 percent of all volunteering activity comes from formal voluntary work13.
Within Europe, also strong heterogeneity exists in volunteering rates, both in the general population and in the population of older adults15. Volunteering rates within
Europe show a clear North-South gradient15,16, with relatively high participation rates
in Northern European countries (Sweden and Denmark: 17% - 18%; the Netherlands: 21%) and relatively low participation rates in Southern European countries (Italy: 7%; Greece and Spain: 2% - 3%)15. These differences may be explained by culture-related
differences in the formalization of helping behaviors15, or by intercultural differences
in how helping behavior is recognized5,15. In Southern European countries, rates of
informal support, such as providing support to others within the direct social network (family and close friends), are higher than those in Northern European countries, crowding-out more formal types of helping behaviors such as volunteering15,17,18.
Moreover, cultural differences exist in how helping behaviors are recognized; in certain cultures, acts of helping others are considered normal behaviors, which are embedded in cultural norms and are therefore not always recognized as distinct
1
activities, whereas individuals in other societies in which helping others is less obvious, would probably recognize the same type of helping behavior as volunteering5.
Overall, the proportion of Dutch adults participating in voluntary work is higher than in other European countries2. In the Netherlands in the period 2012-2016, around
50 percent of the adults aged 55 to 75 years is estimated to have participated in voluntary work at least once a year19. Among older adults aged 75 years and older,
the participation rate is estimated to be around 30 percent19. Volunteering individuals
(aged 15 and over) contribute on average a bit more than four hours per week to their volunteering activities. A total of 36 percent reports incidental volunteering, contributing a couple of hours per year to voluntary activities19. A total of 24 percent
of the volunteering individuals reports a contribution of one to three hours per week, 24 percent of the volunteers contribute 3 to 8 hours per week and 16 percent reports a contribution of even 8 hours or more per week19. Dutch volunteers participate in
voluntary work for various organizations, including sports organizations, educational institutions, nursing and health care organizations, youth, religious and cultural institutions19.
SOCIETAL RELEVANCE OF VOLUNTEERING
Many benefits of volunteering have been identified, positively affecting volunteering individuals, non-profit organizations, and societies at large7,20–22. Various health-related
benefits of volunteering have been found in previous research. Meta-analyses23,24
provide strong evidence for the inverse relationship between participation in voluntary work and mortality, even after controlling for important potential confounders, such as socio-demographic and health-related characteristics. A recent randomized controlled trial has demonstrated that volunteering is significantly related to better sit-to-stand scores and fast pace walk scores, which are important indicators of physical functioning25. Moreover, longitudinal cohort studies show that participation in
voluntary work is significantly associated with lower depression rates23,26, better
self-rated health26, fewer functional limitations26, less self-reported memory complaints
and a lower likelihood to be prescribed anti-dementia treatment (i.e. medication)27.
Participation in voluntary work is one of the main activities for enhancing active ageing20. Participation in voluntary work can contribute to both physical, cognitive
and social activity27,28, and is therefore a good substitute for paid work after retirement.
By enhancing physical, cognitive and social activity, volunteering is a useful activity to protect seniors from cognitive decline and dementia risk27. Not only can individuals
enhance their cognitive reserve by volunteering, risk factors that are associated with the development of dementia are also improved27. Individual benefits from
volunteering may even be larger among older adults than among younger adults7,20,29,
as the positive association between volunteering and both life satisfaction and perceived health is stronger among older than in younger individuals29. Individual
health and well-being related benefits are reflected in benefits at the societal level, in terms of lower health care costs (i.e. treatment of mental problems such as depression). Other societal-level benefits of volunteering include enhancement of social inclusion, integration and social solidarity5 as well as economic benefits30.
Participation in voluntary work, especially among older adults, contributes to social sustainability in terms of the pension and health care systems which are under increasing pressure as a result of population ageing31.
POTENTIAL VOLUNTEERS
Because of the various benefits of voluntary work both at the individual and the societal level, and in order to enhance active and healthy ageing, promoting participation in voluntary work in later life seems a relevant public health policy. Sustainable employability of older adults in paid and unpaid work already is an important goal for local and national policy makers1,5,21. Substantial levels of unused
capacity of potential volunteers may exist among older adults32,33, especially among
the growing population of retired, but still active individuals34. Although volunteering
rates in the Netherlands are relatively high compared to other Western countries, there still might be a considerable latent volunteer availability, especially among the large baby-boom generation. Potential volunteers are defined as “people who do not volunteer at the moment but are willing to do so in the future”33 (p. 1109). Of the
non-volunteering individuals aged 60 to 80, participating in the Lifelines Cohort Study, and who have never volunteered in their life, more than one-third (36.1%) indicates to be willing to participate in voluntary work in the future. Among this group of potential volunteers, about half (53.0%) experiences constraints making it difficult to currently participate in voluntary work, 22.6% would be willing to participate when being asked, and 24.4% is planning to volunteer in the future. Therefore, a substantial recruitment potential seems to be present among older individuals without previous volunteering experiences. Of the non-volunteering individuals aged 60 to 80, participating in the Lifelines Cohort Study, with previous volunteer experiences, about two-third of the participants has very positive volunteering experiences, was very satisfied with the voluntary work, and has largely enjoyed volunteering. Although the majority of this
1
group (84.9%) does not intend to resume volunteering within the next sixth months, earlier research has shown that previous volunteering experience is an important predictor for taking-up volunteering again in the future4, suggesting that this group
harbors a substantial recruitment potential as well.
Understanding the antecedents of volunteering is important for improving recruitment strategies targeting non-volunteers as well as retention strategies targeting active volunteers22,33,35. The antecedents of volunteering can be analyzed at different levels,
including the social system, volunteering organizations and the level of the individual volunteer.11 In the current dissertation, individual antecedents of volunteering are
central, which include subjective dispositions (such as motivations) as well as individual resources, age, gender and available time.
MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE THESIS
The overall objective of this PhD-thesis is to improve our knowledge and understanding of individual-level antecedents of volunteering. Two central questions are addressed:
1. Who volunteers? (Part I)
2. Why do some older individuals volunteer, whereas others do not? (Part II)
Part I of this thesis is devoted to improving our knowledge regarding who volunteers.
Current research in this field is characterized by two important shortcomings. First, although a rich literature on individual determinants of voluntary work exists, and several factors are consistently associated with participation in voluntary work (e.g. higher levels of education, age (curvilinear relationship), being married and enjoying good health4), many other findings are inconclusive. Inconsistencies in the findings can
be the result of, among other factors, differences in study population (e.g. country, age group, volunteers from specific volunteering organizations) and differences in study design (e.g. timing of follow-up measurement, measurement of the determinants and outcome variables). Moreover, it is unclear whether the established determinants of volunteering identified a couple of decades ago (for example in the review by Wilson4), are still relevant in current societies. During the previous decades, Western
societies have changed substantially in terms of their demographic composition and in the level of societal participation of older individuals1. Therefore, we conduct
voluntary work, in order to establish the contemporary individual key-determinants of volunteering. Second, possibilities for participating in voluntary work are not only dependent upon the availability of individual resources, but also upon an individuals’ situation within the life course. Most research on factors associated with participation in voluntary work takes a static approach, whereas participation in voluntary work is often a dynamic process7,22,36, which varies over the life course as a result of
changing availability of time and changing preferences for time allocation37. The
available studies that investigated the association between life course transitions and participation in voluntary work show that experiencing life course transitions are related to changing volunteering behavior, but to date there is a lack of understanding how and why experiencing major life events are related to transitions in volunteering behavior. Therefore, the associations between experiencing major life events over the life course and changes in participation in voluntary work are studied in the current dissertation. By applying a longitudinal approach, transitions into (starting) and out of (quitting) voluntary work can be studied. The theory-driven approach that is used can help in improving our understanding of why major life events are associated with changes in volunteering.
The following research questions are addressed in Part I:
1. Which individual resources (i.e. human, social and cultural capital) are associated with participation in voluntary work over the life course, and what are the magnitudes and directions of these associations?
2. To what extent are major life course transitions related to changes in participation in voluntary work, and how can this be explained?
Part II of this thesis is devoted to improving our understanding of why some
individuals in later life participate in voluntary work whereas others do not. We focus on older adults, because this group comprises the largest pool of unused potential volunteering capacity, especially among the growing population of retired, but still active individuals. In the research field aiming to understand why some older individuals volunteer whereas others do not, volunteer motivations are central. Although substantial research has been conducted within the field of volunteer motivations in the past decades, the current research is characterized by an important shortcoming. In previous studies, motivations to volunteer have been retrospectively
1
assessed among volunteering individuals. As a result, it is unclear whether motivations to volunteer differ between volunteering and non-volunteering individuals, and to what extent volunteer motivations are important for actual volunteering. In the current dissertation, therefore, volunteer motivations among volunteering and non-volunteering individuals are compared. In order to do so, we (a) cross-culturally validate a measurement instrument for assessing volunteer motivations among volunteering individuals in the Dutch context, (b) adapt this measurement instrument to make it applicable for assessing motivations to volunteer among non-volunteering individuals too, and (c) use this adapted scale to compare volunteer motivations between volunteers and non-volunteers in order to assess the discriminative ability of motivations for actual volunteering. Thereby, we aim to gain new insights into the role of volunteer motivations for actual volunteering.
The following main research questions are addressed in Part II:
3. Do older volunteering individuals differ from older non-volunteering individuals in terms of the types and strength of volunteer motivations?
4. Is the association between volunteer motivations and actual volunteering in later life moderated by the availability of individual resources?
The model in Figure 3 depicts the hypothesized volunteer model, including the individual-level antecedents of voluntary work and actual volunteering behavior.
Figure 3 The volunteer model that is central in this dissertation
LIFELINES COHORT STUDY
Four chapters of this dissertation are based on data from the Lifelines Cohort Study38,39
(Chapter 3, 4, 5 and 6). Lifelines is a multi-disciplinary prospective population-based cohort study examining in a unique three-generation design the health and health-related behaviors of 167,729 persons living in the North of the Netherlands. It employs a broad range of investigative procedures to assess the biomedical, socio-demographic, behavioral, physical and psychological factors which contribute to the health and disease of the general population, with a special focus on multi-morbidity and complex genetics. The study profile of Lifelines is described elsewhere38,39. Briefly,
participants were recruited between 2006 and 2013. Inhabitants (aged 25 to 50 years) of the three Northern provinces of the Netherlands were invited by their General Practitioners (GPs) if, according to their GP, they met the following eligibility criteria: (1) no severe psychiatric or physical illness, (2) no limited (<5 years) life expectancy, and (3) sufficient knowledge of the Dutch language to complete a Dutch questionnaire. Subsequently, respondents’ family members were invited to participate in the Lifelines study as well, leading to a unique three-generation design. Additionally, inhabitants of the Northern provinces of the Netherlands could self-register to be included in the study via the Lifelines website. Baseline assessment consisting of physical examination, collecting blood and urine samples, interviews and self-report questionnaires was conducted between 2006 and 2013. On average, participants
1
are followed-up every 1.5 years by additional questionnaires, and every 5 years by a physical examination. The Lifelines Cohort Study is approved by the medical ethical committee of the University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands. All participants signed an informed consent form. Lifelines is a facility that is open to all researchers. Information on the application and data access procedure is summarized on www.lifelines.nl.
LIFELINES DAILY ACTIVITIES AND LEISURE ACTIVITIES
ADD-ON STUDY
Three chapters (4,5,6) of this thesis used the data collected within an add-on study within Lifelines, the Lifelines Daily Activities and Leisure Activities add-on Study (Lifelines DALAS). For this add-on study, conducted in 2017, all adults aged 60 to 80 who were invited to participate in the second assessment at least six months ago, and who actually filled-out the fourth Lifelines questionnaire (Questionnaire 2A), were invited to participate in Lifelines Daily Activities and Leisure Activities add-on Study (Lifelines DALAS). We developed the Lifelines DALAS questionnaire specifically to address the research questions of this dissertation. The Lifelines DALAS questionnaire consists of a broad range of measures related to health, quality of life and lifestyle, as well as a broad range of questions assessing daily activities (i.e. employment, providing informal care and voluntary work, caretaking of grandchildren) and leisure activities (i.e. sports, cultural activities, traveling, social contacts). A full section of the questionnaire is devoted to participation in voluntary work, containing questions about current and former participation in voluntary work, the frequency, duration, intensity and type of volunteering as well as the motivations underlying volunteering. The timing of the data collection of the Lifelines DALAS as well as the other Lifelines measurements is depicted in Figure 4.
2007 … 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 … Baseline Assessment
- Visit 1A1 and 1A2 - Questionnaire 1A
Questionnaire 1B Questionnaire 1C
Second Assessment - Visit 2A1 and 2A2 - Questionnaire 2A
Questionnaire 2B L i fe l i n e s DALAS* *Lifelines DALAS was distributed between May and December 2017
Figure 4 Timing of data-collection of Lifelines DALAS in the timeline of the Lifelines Cohort Study
OUTLINE OF THIS THESIS
Part I of this thesis is devoted to the study of factors associated with participation
in voluntary work over the life course in the general population. We start with summarizing the available evidence on the key individual determinants of participation in voluntary work among the general Western population, by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis in Chapter 2. Participation in voluntary work is a dynamic process, with individuals transitioning into and out of voluntary work, for example as a result of (unexpected) major events. In Chapter 3, we study whether, and to what extent, experiencing major life events over the life course is associated with volunteer take-up and volunteer cessation.
Even though individuals can be comparable in terms of the resources they have at their disposal, and in the extent to which they are subject to major life events, they can still differ in their volunteer status, and their response to major life events in terms of changing volunteering behavior. Motivations to volunteer potentially are key factors in explaining these differences. Therefore, motivations to volunteer are central in the second part of this dissertation.
Part II of this thesis is devoted to improving our understanding of the role of
volunteer motivations in determining volunteering behavior. In this part, we focus on older adults, because this group comprises the largest pool of unused potential volunteering capacity, especially among the growing population of retired, and still active individuals. In Chapter 4, we translate and validate a widely used instrument for
1
measuring volunteer motivations, the Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI), to be used among populations of older Dutch volunteers. In Chapter 5, we apply this validated Dutch VFI, as a starting point to develop an adapted measurement instrument for assessing and comparing volunteer motivations between volunteer samples and non-volunteer samples. In Chapter 6, we study the associations between volunteer motivations and actual volunteering, and assess the potential moderation of these associations by the availability of individual resources, among Dutch older adults. Finally, a general discussion of the findings (reported in Chapters 2-6) is provided in Chapter 7, in which we also formulate recommendations for future research and policy.
REFERENCES
1. de Boer AH, van Brakel K, Eysink PED, et al. Gezondheid En Maatschappelijke Participatie.
Themarapport Volksgezondheid Toekomst Verkenning 2014.; Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid
en Milieu, RIVM, Bilthoven, the Netherlands, 2013. http://www.rivm.nl/Documenten_en_ publicaties/Wetenschappelijk/Rapporten/2013/oktober/Gezondheid_en_maatschappelijke_ participatie_Themarapport_Volksgezondheid_Toekomst_Verkenning_2014.
2. Nimwegen N Van, Praag C Van. Bevolkingsvraagstukken in Nederland Anno 2012.; Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute, NIDI, the Hague, the Netherlands, 2012.
3. Cnaan RA, Handy F, Wadsworth M. Defining Who Is a Volunteer: Conceptual and Empirical Considerations. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 1996;25(3):364-383.
4. Wilson J. Volunteering. Annu Rev Sociol. 2000;26:215-240.
5. International Labour Office Geneva. Manual on the Measurement of Volunteer Work.; International Labour Office: Geneva, Switzerland, 2011. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---stat/documents/publication/wcms_162119.pdf.
6. Pavlova MK, Silbereisen RK. Perceived Expectations for Active Aging, Formal Productive Roles, and Psychological Adjustment Among the Young-Old. Res Aging. 2016;38(1):26-50. doi:10.1177/0164027515573026
7. Morrow-Howell N. Volunteering in Later Life : Research Frontiers. J Gerontol Soc Sci. 2010;65B(4):461-469. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbq024
8. Ehlers A, Naegele G, Reichert M. Volunteering by Older People in the EU.; 2011. https://www. eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2011/quality-of-life-social-policies/volunteering-by-older-people-in-the-eu.
9. Burr JA, Mutchler JE, Caro FG. Productive activity clusters among middle-aged and older adults: Intersecting forms and time commitments. Journals Gerontol - Ser B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2007;62(4):267-275. doi:10.1093/geronb/62.4.S267
10. Wilson J, Musick M. Who Cares ? Toward an Integrated Theory of Volunteer Work. Am Sociol Rev. 1997;62(5):694-713. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2657355.
11. Omoto AM, Snyder M. Considerations of community : The context and process of volunteerism.
Am Behav Sci. 2002;45(5):846-867+762. doi:10.1177/0002764202045005007
12. Clary EG, Snyder M, Ridge RD, et al. Understanding and Assessing the Motivations of Volunteers: A Functional Approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;74(6):1516-1530. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1516 13. United Nations Volunteers (UNV) programme. The Thread That Binds. Volunteerism and Community
Resilience.; 2018. http://unv-swvr2018.org/files/51692_UNV_SWVR_2018_WEB.pdf.
14. Doug Baer, Lionel Prouteau, David Swindell, Aida Sivicka, David H. Smith K-TT. Conducive Macro-Contexts Influencing Volunteering. In: The Palgrave Handbook of Volunteering, Civic Participation,
and Nonprofit Associations. ; 2016:580-606.
15. Hank K, Erlinghagen M. Dynamics of Volunteering in Older Europeans. Gerontologist. 2010;50(2):170-178. doi:10.1093/geront/gnp122
16. Mascherini M, Vidoni D, Manca AR. Exploring the determinants of civil participation in 14 European countries: One-size-fits none. Eur Sociol Rev. 2011;27(6):790-807. doi:10.1093/esr/jcq041
1
17. Hank K. Societal Determinants of Productive Aging: A Multilevel Analysis across 11 European Countries. Eur Sociol Rev. 2011;27(4):526-541. doi:10.1093/esr/jcq023
18. Pichler F, Wallace C. Patterns of Formal and Informal Social Capital in Europe. Eur Sociol Rev. 2007;23(4):423-435. doi:10.1093/esr/jcm013
19. Schmeets H, Arends J. Vrijwilligerswerk: wie doet het ? In: CBS Statistische Trends. ; 2017:1-19. 20. Principi A, Galenkamp H, Papa R, et al. Do predictors of volunteering in older age differ by health
status? Eur J Ageing. 2016;13(2):91-102. doi:10.1007/s10433-016-0377-0
21. Stukas AA, Hoye R, Nicholson M, Brown KM, Aisbett L. Motivations to Volunteer and Their Associations With Volunteers’ Well-Being. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2016;45(1):112-132. doi:10.1177/0899764014561122
22. Butrica BA, Johnson RW, Zedlewski SR. Volunteer Dynamics of Older Americans. J Gerontol Soc
Sci. 2009;64B(5):644-655. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbn042.
23. Jenkinson CE, Dickens AP, Jones K, et al. Is volunteering a public health intervention? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the health and survival of volunteers. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(773). doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-773
24. Okun MA, Yeung EW, Brown S. Volunteering by Older Adults and Risk of Mortality: A Meta-Analysis. Psychol Aging. 2013;28(2):564-577. doi:10.1037/a0031519
25. Pettigrew S, Jongenelis MI, Jackson B, Warburton J, Newton RU. A randomized controlled trial and pragmatic analysis of the effects of volunteering on the health and well-being of older people.
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019;(0123456789). doi:10.1007/s40520-019-01241-3
26. Anderson ND, Damianakis T, Kröger E, et al. The Benefits Associated With Volunteering Among Seniors: A Critical Review and Recommendations for Future Research. Psychol Bull. 2014:1505-1533. doi:10.1037/a0037610
27. Griep Y, Hanson LM, Vantilborgh T, Janssens L, Jones SK, Hyde M. Can volunteering in later life reduce the risk of dementia? A 5-year longitudinal study among volunteering and non-volunteering retired seniors. PLoS One. 2017;12(3):1-14. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0173885 28. Fried LP, Carlson MC, Freedman M, et al. A Social Model for Health Promotion for an Aging
Population: Initial Evidence on the Experience Corps Model. J Urban Heal. 2004;81(1):64-78. doi:10.1093/jurban/jth094
29. Van Willigen M. Differential benefits of volunteering across the life course. Journals Gerontol - Ser
B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2000;55(5):308-318. doi:10.1093/geronb/55.5.S308
30. Salamon LM, Sokowski SW, Haddock MA, Tice HS. The State of Global Civil Society and Volunteering: Latest findings from the implementation of the UN Nonprofit Handbook. Work
Pap No49 (Baltimore John Hopkins Cent Civ Soc Stud 2012).
31. Galenkamp H, Deeg DJH. Increasing social participation of older people: are there different barriers for those in poor health? Introduction to the special section. Eur J Ageing. 2016;13(2):87-90. doi:10.1007/s10433-016-0379-y
32. Okun MA, Schultz A. Age and motives for volunteering: Testing hypotheses derived from socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychol Aging. 2003;18(2):231-239. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.18.2.231 33. Dury S, De Donder L, De Witte N, Buffel T, Jacquet W, Verté D. To Volunteer or Not: The Influence
of Individual Characteristics, Resources, and Social Factors on the Likelihood of Volunteering by Older Adults. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2015;44(6):1107-1128. doi:10.1177/0899764014556773
34. Willems J, Dury S. Reasons for not volunteering: overcoming boundaries to attract volunteers.
Serv Ind J. 2017;37(11-12):726-745. doi:10.1080/02642069.2017.1318381
35. Chacón F, Gutiérrez G, Sauto V, Vecina ML, Pérez A. Volunteer Functions Inventory: A systematic review. Psicothema. 2017;29(3):306-316. doi:10.7334/psicothema2016.371
36. Rotolo T. A Time to Join , A Time to Quit : The Influence of Life Cycle Transitions on Voluntary Association Membership “. Soc Forces. 2000;78(3)(March):1133-1161.
37. Nesbit R. The Influence of Major Life Cycle Events on Volunteering. Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q. 2012;41(6):1153-1174. doi:10.1177/0899764011429181
38. Scholtens S, Smidt N, Swertz MA, et al. Cohort Profile: LifeLines, a three-generation cohort study and biobank. Int J Epidemiol. 2015;44(4):1172-1180. doi:10.1093/ije/dyu229
39. Klijs B, Scholtens S, Mandemakers JJ, Snieder H, Stolk RP, Smidt N. Representativeness of the LifeLines Cohort Study. PLoS One. 2015;10(9). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0137203
40. Jenkinson CE, Dickens AP, Jones K, et al. Is volunteering a public health intervention? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the health and survival of volunteers. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(773). doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-773
