This study used the conceptual lens of familisation and defamilisation to examine how different social safety net policy instruments shape low-income family processes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 28 welfare recipients in Shanghai and Taipei. The study reveals unique patterns under non-Western and low-income contexts. Means-tested cash transfers inadvertently reinforced familisation processes; defamilisation tendencies were observed in subsidies and services tailored for children and parents, and a hybrid process emerged from employment support. Given that low-income families value both defamilisation and familisation measures, the study highlights the critical need for social safety net policies to balance these components.
BambraC (2007) Defamilisation and welfare state regimes: A cluster analysis. International Journal of Social Welfare16(4): 326–338.
2.
ChauRYuS (2012) Defamilisation of twenty-two countries: Its implications for the study of East Asian welfare regime. Social Policy and Society12(3): 355–367.
3.
ChauRYuS (2021) Familization risks, defamilization risks and older women. Journal of Women & Aging33(3): 312–327.
4.
ChiuWWongK (2009) A Literature Review of Family Policy in Four East Asian Societies. Hong Kong, China: The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
5.
ChoE (2014) Defamilization typology re-examined: Re-measuring the economic independence of women in welfare states. Journal of European Social Policy24(5): 442–454.
6.
ChoiYKühnerSShiS (2022) From ‘new social risks’ to ‘COVID social risks’: The challenges for inclusive society in South Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan amid the pandemic. Policy and Society41(2): 260–274.
7.
DalyM (2011) What adult worker model? A critical look at recent social policy reform in Europe from a gender and family perspective. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society18(1): 1–23.
8.
DalyM (2018) Towards a theorization of the relationship between poverty and family. Social Policy & Administration52(3): 565–577.
9.
DuCGuanY (2019) Examining the development of social welfare privatization in Taiwan from the perspective of interaction between non-profit organizations and the government. Community Development Quarterly166: 28–41. (in Chinese)
10.
Esping-AndersenG (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
11.
HanY (2014) Familialism, de-familialization, and re-familialism: Practice and implications of family policies in welfare states. Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Social Science Edition)40(6): 21–28. (in Chinese)
12.
HollidayI (2005) East Asian social policy in the wake of the financial crisis: Farewell to productivism?Policy & Politics33(1): 145–162.
13.
KangJ (2019) Convergence of family policy across welfare regimes (1990 to 2010): Different connotations of family policy expansion. International Journal of Social Welfare28(2): 167–178.
14.
LeitnerS (2003) Varieties of familialism: The caring function of the family in comparative perspective. European Societies5(4): 353–375.
15.
LewisJ (1992) Gender and the development of welfare regimes. Journal of European Social Policy2(3): 159–173.
16.
LewisJ (2001) The decline of the male breadwinner model: Implications for work and care. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society8(2): 152–169.
17.
ListerR (1990) Women, economic dependency and citizenship. Journal of Social Policy19(4): 445–467.
18.
LohmannHZagelH (2016) Family policy in comparative perspective: The concepts and measurement of familization and defamilization. Journal of European Social Policy26(1): 48–65.
19.
LouSWangD (2016) The transformation of East Asia familialism in an era of aging: Case study of social welfare policy for the elderly in Japan and South Korea. Journal of Public Administration9(4): 88–103. (in Chinese)
20.
MillerR (2000) Researching Life Stories and Family Histories. London: Sage.
21.
Motel-KlingebielATesch-RoemerCVon KondratowitzH (2005) Welfare states do not crowd out the family: Evidence for mixed responsibility from comparative analyses. Ageing and Society25(6): 863–882.
22.
OchiaiE (2009) Care diamonds and welfare regimes in East and South-East Asian societies: Bridging family and welfare sociology. International Journal of Japanese Sociology18(1): 60–78.
23.
OrloffA (1993) Gender and the social rights of citizenship: The comparative analysis of gender relations and welfare states. American Sociological Review58(3): 303–328.
24.
SaracenoC (2016) Varieties of familialism: Comparing four southern European and East Asian welfare regimes. Journal of European Social Policy26(4): 314–326.
25.
SaundersBSimJKingstoneT, et al. (2018) Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity52: 1893–1907.
26.
ShiS (2017) The bounded welfare pluralism: Public–private partnerships under social management in China. Public Management Review19(4): 463–478.
27.
WalkerAWongC (2005) East Asian Welfare Regimes in Transition: From Confucianism to Globalisation. Bristol: Policy Press.
28.
WangJCaiYGaoQ (2021) How effective are social safety net programs in reducing poverty risks? A comparative study of Taiwan and Southeast China. Journal of Asian Public Policy15: 338–373.
29.
YuSChauCKühnerS (2020) Defamilisation and familisation risks, adult worker models, and pro-employment/decommodification measures for women: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy35(2): 194–210.
30.
YuSFosterLChauR, et al. (2017) An investigation of defamilization/familization measures to assist women to save pension income and strengthen the adult worker model: The case of Hong Kong. Asian Social Work and Policy Review11(3): 234–243.
31.
ZagelHLohmannH (2021) Conceptualising state-market-family relationships in comparative research: A conceptual goodness view on defamilization. Journal of Social Policy50: 852–870.
32.
ZhangHTanH (2023) The feelings of living in poverty and depending on social assistance: An exploratory study on gender differences in Dibao families in China. International Social Work66(6): 1760–1772.
