Band 69, Heft 2

Households are prime locations of risk pooling and redistribution. Household constellations in terms of the number of earners and their occupations define households’ capacity to cushion crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic or rising inflation. The occupational structure and the sociodemographic composition of households continue to vary widely between the former East and West German regions. Against the background of rising levels of in-work poverty in recent years, we extend the prevalence and penalties framework as used in poverty research to two occupational risks that gained significance in post-COVID-19 labour markets. Our study addresses two questions: 1) How prevalent were household constellations in which the sole earner or both earners worked in an occupation that was both non-teleworkable and non-essential (NTNE) in East and West Germany in 2019? 2) Did the poverty penalty associated with the sole or both earners working in NTNE occupations differ in East and West Germany in 2019? The most recent available data from the German Microcensus (2019, N=179,755 households) is linked to new data collected on the teleworkability of occupations and occupations’ classification as essential by German federal state decrees in the spring of 2020. Descriptive statistics and regression models show that the prevalence of household constellations where the sole earner or both earners worked in NTNE occupations was relatively similar across East and West Germany. In contrast to overall similar prevalence, in East Germany the poverty penalty associated with the sole or both earners working in NTNE occupations was substantially elevated. Controlling for known occupational disadvantages, including low education, fixed-term contracts, shift work and the lack of leadership responsibilities narrowed but did not eliminate the sizeable gap in poverty penalties associated with NTNE occupations between East and West Germany.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to fundamental changes in all aspects of public life. Non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) have had a significant impact on children given their early developmental stage and the smaller number of coping strategies and resources they possess to counter such stressors. Since the discourse on the effectiveness and side effects of interventions plays an important role in legitimising these interventions, the present article seeks to determine both who talks about children’s mental health in the news media and which aspects are addressed. The results of a quantitative discourse analysis of three German daily and weekly newspapers during the first two lockdowns in Germany reveal that political actors speak most often in the discourse, though health professionals are playing an increasingly prominent role. Thematically, mental health among children is becoming significantly more important in the discourse, which will likely lead to future political action.

Zusammenfassung Ein zentrales Element wohlfahrtsstaatlicher Tätigkeit ist Umverteilung. Familie stellt dabei ein wichtiges Kriterium in der Umverteilung europäischer Wohlfahrtsstaaten dar. Bisher wurde Familie als eigenständiges Prinzip wohlfahrtsstaatlicher Umverteilung jedoch kaum analysiert. Die vorliegende Studie untersucht auf Basis des europäischen Simulationsmodells EUROMOD am Fallbeispiel Deutschland, in welchem Ausmaß Familie Ressourcen gewährt bzw. von ihr eingefordert werden. Umverteilung in Bezug auf Familie wird also in Hinblick auf Rechte und Pflichten analysiert. Unsere Ergebnisse zeigen, dass der deutsche Wohlfahrtsstaat in Bezug auf Familie als Umverteilungsprinzip komplexer ist als gemeinhin angenommen. Zwar bestätigt unsere Studie, dass der deutsche Wohlfahrtsstaat verheiratete Paare finanziell besonders unterstützt, zugleich wird jedoch deutlich, dass die wohlfahrtsstaatliche Umverteilung von zahlreichen familienbezogenen Kriterien abhängt und bei der konkreten Zuweisung von Ressourcen mittels spezifischer Umverteilungsregelungen systematisch nach Familienformen unterschieden wird. Die wohlfahrtsstaatliche Umverteilung ist somit geprägt von ungleichen Zuweisungen und Einforderungen von Ressourcen, abhängig von der Familienform, in der man lebt. Die Studie leistet einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Analyse wohlfahrtsstaatlicher Umverteilungslogiken.