Introduction
Europe is ageing — rapidly and unevenly. At the same time, societies are becoming more diverse in terms of not only age structure, but also social, economic and cultural composition. This demographic transformation raises urgent questions about the distribution of resources, responsibilities, and opportunities between generations.
Intergenerational solidarity reflects the aspiration for mutual support and cohesion between age groups in the face of demographic change. However, translating this into practice requires greater clarity. Although the term evokes social equality, it can also mask deep-seated inequalities that shape opportunities and constraints throughout life.
To realise its full potential, intergenerational solidarity must be grounded in fairness and responsiveness to diversity, as well as a commitment to addressing the structural factors that affect people differently depending on their age, gender, education, socio-economic background or family situation, among others.
A recent expert meeting, organised by the EU-funded Age-It project (Ageing Well in an Ageing Society), brought together leading researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to discuss the need for a new, fairer approach that recognises the cumulative nature of disadvantage and responds to the structural changes reshaping Europe’s longevity societies. Participants included, among others, Licia Boccaletti (Anziani e Non Solo), Andreas Edel (Population Europe), Alexia Fürnkranz-Prskawetz (Technical University of Vienna, Wittgenstein Centre for Demography and Global Human Capital, and Vienna Institute of Demography), Pietro Gagliardi (OECD), Regina Maroncelli (European Large Families Confederation), Liz Mestheneos (AGE Platform), and Daniele Vignoli (University of Florence). Discussions are presented below.
Measuring Fairness Across Generations
The quantification of intergenerational justice is still in its early stages. A groundbreaking new study—not yet published—led by Vincenzo Galasso (Bocconi University) offers an attempt to construct an index of intergenerational justice that allows at least some aspects of the differences between younger and older individuals to be measured.
The results suggest that older adults tend to fare relatively better in terms of economic indicators: they are less likely to be unemployed, more likely to have stable employment, and often have greater financial resilience. In contrast, younger adults are more vulnerable to precarious work, housing insecurity and economic shocks — trends exacerbated by the fallout from recent crises.
Access to public goods also tends to favour older groups, though patterns vary by country. Healthcare, social transfers and environmental quality are not always distributed equitably between age groups or regions. One area where younger adults appear to be better off is relational wellbeing, reflected in social engagement and mental health.
In political life, older adults are significantly overrepresented. They vote at higher rates, are more likely to be politically active, and dominate elected institutions. Meanwhile, younger people report lower levels of trust, participation, and perceived influence in political processes.
These results prompted important questions in our meeting about how intergenerational fairness is defined and measured, and whether chronological age alone is a sufficient basis for analysis and policy design, particularly when considering the reality of older persons in low socio-economic status or older women. Social class, education, family background and health intersect with age to shape opportunities and constraints. While chronological age is easy to measure, it is a blunt instrument that does not reflect the diversity of people's experiences and needs.
Age Discrimination and the Importance of Objective Assessments
The first element to consider is how age groups are perceived. The terms youngism and ageism provide a useful framework for this exercise, as it is not only a matter of social attitudes; it is also deeply embedded in institutional practice, leading to biases in perceptions of younger and older generations.
Chronological age is still all too often used as a proxy for health or capacity. For example, older adults are often routinely excluded from clinical trials and preventive care, limiting the evidence base for treatments relevant to this population. In many countries, individuals above certain age thresholds are also denied access to treatment options solely on the basis of age rather than medical need.
This structural discrimination undermines both individual rights and the effectiveness of healthcare systems. Indeed, substantial evidence suggests that ageism incurs significant costs for healthcare systems while exacerbating health conditions (Levy et al., 2020).
Age discrimination also affects the quality of care across the life course. Older patients are often assessed using tools designed for younger populations, leading to misdiagnosis and undertreatment, while younger people may face barriers to being taken seriously in clinical settings or accessing mental health support. Addressing ageism, therefore, requires systemic change in research, clinical protocols, and professional training—not just awareness campaigns.
Equitable ageing policies must therefore be centred on objective approaches that recognise functional diversity and reject age as a shortcut for decision-making (Ungar et al., 2024).
The Long Shadow of Early Life
The second argument for placing less emphasis on chronological age as a basis for intergenerational fairness is that ageing is not solely an issue for older people. It is a lifelong process, shaped by social and economic conditions from birth onwards. Childhood resources, health status, labour market participation patterns, caregiving responsibilities and public life participation—often established in one's twenties and thirties—have a lasting effect on later-life outcomes.
According to evidence presented by Professor Agar Brugiavini, in some European contexts, particularly in Southern Europe, women face significant barriers to labour market participation. Many withdraw from paid work in their mid-twenties due to childcare and caregiving demands, and never formally return to employment.
This results in cohorts of older women who do not officially retire, but instead depend on family income or minimal social support. The long-term consequences are stark: women receive significantly lower pensions than men, even when accounting for differences in education or years worked.
Territorial disparities further compound these inequities. Municipal spending on services for older adults varies dramatically across regions, reflecting broader inequalities in infrastructure and social investment. Interestingly, areas with higher public spending on children and families also tend to have better life expectancy, highlighting the importance of early investment in shaping long-term well-being.
While often controversial, reforms to pension systems have sometimes helped to mitigate inequalities, particularly when they shift entitlements towards greater actuarial fairness. An example of this is the Monti-Fornero pension reform in Italy (2011), where unintended redistributions that favour the already advantaged were successfully avoided.
Bridging generations? Mid-Life as a Critical Life Course Stage for Intergenerational Fairness
As previously mentioned, the early adult years leave a lasting impact on how people age. Unpaid care, especially that provided within families, is a particularly important issue at this stage in life, as it remains a critical yet invisible part of the long-term care ecosystem.
Middle-aged women are the primary providers of personal care across Europe, often balancing paid work with intensive caregiving responsibilities. Those caring for both older relatives and their children, and sometimes even grandchildren, are known as the 'sandwich generation'. This double burden has profound implications for gender equality, economic security and mental health.
Yet unpaid family care is rarely measured, recognised or adequately supported. For instance, research by Pieter Vanhuysse (2023) has revealed that welfare state benefits primarily target older age groups. Although children in Europe receive substantial resources, these mainly come from their parents in the form of both time and money, rather than from public policies.
Governments continue to assume an unlimited supply of unpaid care without investing in services or protections for those providing it. Rethinking care as a shared societal responsibility rather than a private obligation is essential for ensuring both gender equity and intergenerational fairness.
Towards a Coherent Governance and a New Social Contract
One of the most consistent challenges for policies on ageing is counteracting fragmentation. Health, social care, employment and education policies are governed by separate systems with limited coordination. Without cross-sectoral collaboration, issues such as the structural nature of ageing and intergenerational fairness remain unaddressed.
Data gaps further constrain effective policymaking. Key dynamics such as informal caregiving, cognitive health, social isolation, and functional status are poorly captured in existing indicators. Improving measurement and integrating life-course perspectives into policymaking is therefore essential.
At the heart of the debate lies the question of whether Europe needs a new social contract that reflects the realities of 21st-century demography, labour markets, and family life. The current model, which is based on the assumption of stable employment, nuclear families and age-based entitlements, no longer reflects the lived experience of most Europeans.
A new governance framework must strike a balance between solidarity and fairness. It must recognise that people of all ages contribute to society, whether through paid work, care, volunteering, or civic engagement. Rather than pitting generations against each other, it must address structural inequalities by investing in systems that support wellbeing across the life course.
Conclusion
Intergenerational fairness cannot be taken for granted; it must be actively promoted. This requires a rethink of how societies allocate resources, design services, and create opportunities. A narrow focus on age-based entitlements is no longer sufficient. What is needed is a broader vision that sees people not as old or young, but as individuals moving through life, shaped by cumulative advantage or disadvantage, and deserving of fairness at every stage.
By reimagining the social contract for longevity societies, Europe has the opportunity to demonstrate global leadership in responding to demographic change and in defining what it means to age well together.
Action Points
• Support early life course investment: Ageing begins at birth. Adequate public spending on children is essential for reducing inequalities later in life.
• Strengthen support for younger generations: Young people face increasing barriers to secure employment, housing, and financial independence. Policies must address these structural disadvantages to ensure a fair start in adult life.
• Balance representation: Political systems must ensure that children under 18 have a meaningful voice in decisions that shape their futures, even if they are not the majority of voters.
• Reframe the narrative on ageing: Ageing should be seen as a natural process of continuous agency and adaptations, not inevitable decline.
• Align eligibility with functional needs: Rather than relying solely on chronological age, service eligibility should reflect individuals' functional status and levels of vulnerability.
• Recognise care as a State responsibility: The unpaid care provided by families to both younger and older people must be valued, supported, and connected to formal care systems, respecting subsidiarity.
• Coordinate across sectors for all ages: Policies on ageing must be integrated across the whole of government, notably in health, social protection,transport, housing, employment, and education.
• Improve measurement: Strong indicators on life-course transitions, informal care, and social cohesion are crucial for tracking progress and evaluating policy impacts.
Acknowledgment:
This publication is part of the project Age-It project: Ageing Well in an Ageing Society, funded by Next Generation EU, in the context of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan, Investment PE8 – Project Age-It: “Ageing Well in an Ageing Society” [DM 1557 11.10.2022]. Age-It is an alliance of Italian universities, research centres, private firms, public institutions and civil society, covering, among others, demography, geriatrics and gerontology, neurology, cardiology, immunology, data science, education science, epidemiology, biology, genetic research, engineering, sociology, law, political science, and economics - https://ageit.eu
References
Levy, B.R., Slade, M.D., Chang, E.-S., Kannoth, S. & Wang, S.-Y. (2020). Ageism amplifies cost and prevalence of health conditions. The Gerontologist, 60(1): 174–181. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny131
Rivasi, G., Bulgaresi, M., Mossello, E., Zimmitti, S., Barucci, R., Taverni, I., Espinoza Tofalos, S., Cinelli, G., Nicolaio, G., Secciani, C., Bendoni, A., Rinaldi, G., Da Silva Nakano, D.M., Barchielli, C., Baggiani, L., Bonaccorsi, G., Ungar, A. & Benvenuti, E. (2024). A new hospital-at-home model for integrated geriatric care: Data from a preliminary Italian experience. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 25(12), p. 105295. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2024.105295
Vanhuysse, P., Medgyesi, M. & Gal R.I (2023), Taxing reproduction: the full transfer cost of rearing children in Europe, Royal Society Open Science, 10(10), 230759, https://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230759