The Aged People in the Transitional Elder Care Policy and Service System in Northern Finland

  • Heli ValokiviEmail author
Part of the International Perspectives on Aging book series (Int. Perspect. Aging, volume 22)


Finland is ageing rapidly and the challenges to meet the growing care needs of ageing population are evident. In Finland major health and social care reform is being planned. Previously the municipalities have been responsible for the health and social care services. In the near future there will be 18 counties in charge of health and social services instead of municipalities’. The services will be organized by the counties and produced by public, private and third sector service providers. The main ideas of current elder care policy are ageing in place, user involvement and responsibility and reducing costs.

In this chapter, I will discuss the complex and intertwined issues of current elder care policy, changing elder care service system and experiences and opinions of municipal officials and professionals in charge of services. What is discussed about ageing and aged people and service users? How do politicians and officials evaluate the current elder care service system and the role of older people in it? The data consists of national policy documents and views of northern municipal politicians and health care and social service officials in the centre of the reform and change. The qualitative content analysis applies to the data evaluation. Older people, aged users and old age appear in the national and local political and reform discussion at multiple levels and with myriad implications.


Aged people Elder care policy Elder care service system Policy documents Qualitative content analysis Service users 


  1. Aalto, A.-M., Elovainio, M., Liina-Kaisa Tynkkynen, L.-K., Reissell, E., Vehko, T., Chydenius, M., & Sinervo, T. (2018). What patients think about choice in healthcare? A study on primary care services in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 46(4), 463–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Act on Supporting the Functional Capacity of the Older Population and on Social and Health Care Services for Older Persons. (2012). Laki ikääntyneen väestön toimintakyvyn tukemisesta sekä iäkkäiden sosiaali- ja terveyspalveluista 28.12.2012/980. Finlex Data Bank. Accessed 9 Apr 2018.
  3. Age structure of population. (2018). Statistics Finland. Accessed 3 Apr 2018.
  4. Andrews, G. J., & Phillips, D. R. (2005). Ageing and place: Perspectives, policy, practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Anttonen, A., & Sipilä, J. (1996). European social care services: Is it possible to identify models. Journal of European Social Policy, 6(2), 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anttonen, A., & Karsio, O. (2016). Eldercare service redesign in Finland: Deinstitutionalization of long-term care. Journal of Social Service Research, 42(2), 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burau, V., Zechner, M., Dahl, H. M., & Ranci, C. (2016). The political construction of elder care markets: Comparing Denmark, Finland and Italy. Social Policy and Administration, 51(7), 1023–1041. Scholar
  8. Calasanti, T. (2013). Gender and ageing in the context of globalization. In D. Dannefer & C. Phillipson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social gerontology (pp. 137–149). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Constitution of Finland. (1999). Suomen perustuslaki (11.6.1999/731). Finlex Data Bank. Accessed 4 Apr 2018.
  10. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  11. Finnish municipalities and regions. (2018). Accessed 26 June 2018.
  12. Forman, J., & Damschroder, L. (2007). Qualitative content analysis. In L. Jacoby & L. A. Siminoff (Eds.), Empirical methods for bioethics: A primer (Advances in bioethics) (Vol. 11, pp. 39–62). Bingley, West Yorkshire: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. General description (2018). Regional government, health and social services reform. Accessed 8 Apr 2018.
  14. Government reform packages (2018). Regional government, health and social services reform. Accessed 3 Apr 2018.
  15. Health Care Act (2010). Terveydenhuoltolaki 30.12.2010/1326. Finlex Data Bank. Accessed 9 Apr 2018.Google Scholar
  16. Hodge, G. A., & Greve, C. (2007). Public–private partnerships: An international performance review. Public Administration Review, 67(3), 545–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hokkanen, L., Nikupeteri, A., Laitinen, M., & Vasari, P. (2017). Individual, group and organised experiential expertise in recovery from intimate partner violence and mental health problems in Finland. The British Journal of Social Work, 47(4), 1147–1165. Scholar
  18. Hoppania, H-K. (2015). Care as a site of political struggle. Department of Political and Economic Studies, University of Helsinki. Accessed 26 June 2018.
  19. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Juhila, K., Raitakari, S., & Hansen Löfstrand, C. (2017). Responsibilisation in governmentality literature. In K. Juhila, S. Raitakari, & C. Hall (Eds.), Responsibilisation at the margins of welfare services (pp. 23–48). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Julkunen, R. (2008). Kuka vastaa? Hyvinvointivaltion rajat ja julkinen hyvinvointivastuu. Helsinki: Stakes.Google Scholar
  22. Kalliomaa-Puha, L., Kotkas, T., & Rajavaara, M. (Eds.). (2014). Harkittua? Avauksia sosiaaliturvan harkintavallan tutkimukseen (Teemakirja 13). Helsinki: KELAn tutkimusosasto.Google Scholar
  23. Karsio, O., & Anttonen, A. (2013). Marketisation of eldercare in Finland: Legal frames, outsourcing practices and the rapid growth of for-profit services. In M. Meagher & M. Szebehely (Eds.), Marketisation in Nordic eldercare: A research report on legislation, oversight, extent and consequences (Stockholm studies in social work 30) (pp. 85–124). Stockholm: Stockholm University.Google Scholar
  24. Keskitalo-Foley, S., & Naskali, P. (2016). Tracing gender in political age strategies and press in Finnish Lapland. In P. Naskali, M. Seppänen, & S. Begum (Eds.), Ageing, wellbeing and climate change in the Arctic: An interdisciplinary analysis (pp. 30–48). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Kotihoito ja sosiaalihuollon (2016) Kotihoito ja sosiaalihuollon laitos- ja asumispalvelut 2016. THL. Accessed 30 Apr 2018.
  26. Kröger, T., Anttonen, A., & Sipilä, J. (2003). Social care in Finland: Stronger and weaker forms of universalism. In A. Anttonen, J. Baldock, & J. Sipilä (Eds.), The young, the old and the state: Social Care Systems in Five Industrial Nations (pp. 25–54). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  27. Kröger, T., & Bagnato, A. (2017). Care for older people in early twenty-first-century Europe: Dimensions and directions of change. In F. Martinelli, A. Anttonen, & M. Mätzke (Eds.), Social services disrupted: Changes, challenges and policy implications for Europe in times of austerity (pp. 201–218). Cheltenhamn: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kuntien lukumäärä (2018) Valtiovarainministeriö. Accessed 3 Apr 2018.
  29. Lapin liitto (2017). Accessed 4 Oct 2017.
  30. Lapin Sote-Savotta (2017). Accessed 4 Oct 2017.
  31. Lappi maakuntauudistus (2018). Accessed 26 June 2018.
  32. Leibetseder, B., Anttonen, A., Øverbye, E., Pace, C., & Vabo, S. I. (2017). The horizontal ‘re-mix’ in social care. Trends and implications for service provision. In F. Martinelli, A. Anttonen, & M. Mätzke (Eds.), Social services disrupted changes, challenges and policy implications for Europe in times of austerity (pp. 134–154). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Scholar
  33. Leikas, J. (Ed.). (2014). Ikäteknologia. Helsinki: Vanhustyön keskusliitto.Google Scholar
  34. Local Government Act. (2015). Kuntalaki 10.4.2015/410. Finlex Data Bank. Accessed 26 June 2018.
  35. Lumio, J. (2015). Laitoksesta kotiin – syntyikö säästöjä? Ikäihmisten palveluiden muutosten kustannusvaikutukset Tampereella (Sitran selvityksiä 94). Helsinki: Sitra.Google Scholar
  36. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Social Research, 1(2). Accessed 3 Apr 2018.
  37. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Pohjola, A. (2017). Sote-uudistus muuttuvan yhteiskuntapolitiikan puristuksessa. Janus, 25(2), 171–175.Google Scholar
  39. Pohjola, A., Kairala, M., Lyly, H., & Niskala, A. (Eds.). (2017). Asiakkaasta kehittäjäksi ja vaikuttajaksi: asiakkaiden osallisuuden muutos sosiaali- ja terveyspalveluissa. Tampere: Vastapaino.Google Scholar
  40. Pohjola, A., Kukk, J., & Leppiman, A. (2014). Designing a business service experience: customer’s perspective on value co-creation. Research in Economics and Business: Central and Eastern Europe, 6(1), 51–64.Google Scholar
  41. Pohjola, A. (1990). Asiakas asiakastutkimuksessa. In S. Karvinen, A.-L. Matthies, M. Mäntysaari, A. Pohjola, P. Saarnio, & H. Suhonen (Eds.), Suomalainen sosiaalityö. Helsinki: Sosiaalipoliittinen yhdistys.Google Scholar
  42. Puthenparambil, J. M., Kröger, T., Van Aerschot, L. (2015). Users of home-care services in a Nordic welfare state under marketization. Health and Social Care in the Community, 25(1), 54–64. Scholar
  43. Rasi, P., & Kilpeläinen, A. (2015). The digital competences and agency of older people living in rural villages in Finnish Lapland. International Journal of Media, Technology and Lifelong Learning, 11(2), 149–160.Google Scholar
  44. Seppänen, M., & Koskinen, S. (2010). Ikääntymispolitiikka. In P. Niemelä (Ed.), Hyvinvointipolitiikka (pp. 388–414). Helsinki: WSOYpro Oy.Google Scholar
  45. Services and benefits for old people (2018). Accessed 4 Apr 2018.
  46. Social Welfare Act (2014). Sosiaalihuoltolaki 30.12.2014/1301. Finlex Data Bank. Accessed 9 Apr 2018.
  47. Social welfare (2018). Social welfare and health care system in Finland, responsibilities. Accessed 4 Apr 2018.
  48. Socially Sustainable Finland 2020. (2011). Strategy for social and health policy (Publications of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health 6). Helsinki: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Accessed 12 July 2018.Google Scholar
  49. Sote- ja maakuntauudistuksen lausuntokierros (2016). Sote- ja maakuntauudistuksen lausuntokierros 31.8.-9.11.2016. Accessed 1 Oct 2017.
  50. Szebehely, M., & Meagher, G. (2017). Nordic eldercare – Weak universalism becoming weaker? Journal of European Social Policy. Article published online: December 10, 2017.
  51. Timetable. (2018). Regional government, health and social services reform. Accessed 8 Apr 2018.
  52. Vaarama, M., & Lehto, J. (1996). Vanhuspalvelujen rakennemuutos 1988–1994. In R. Viialainen & J. Lehto (Eds.), Sosiaali- ja terveyspalvelujen rakennemuutos. Laitoshoidon vähentämisestä avopalvelujen kehittämiseen (Stakes Raportteja 192) (pp. 39–60). Helsinki: Stakes.Google Scholar
  53. Van Aerschot, L. (2014). Vanhusten hoiva ja eriarvoisuus, sosiaalisen ja taloudellisen taustan yhteys avun saamiseen ja palvelujen käyttöön (Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1971). Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Victor, C. (2013). The demography of ageing. In D. Dannefer & C. Phillipson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social gerontology (pp. 61–74). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  55. Väestö. (2018). Accessed 8 Apr 2018.
  56. Väestötietoja kunnittain. (2017). Accessed 8 Apr 2018.
  57. Väkiluvun kehitys Lapin kunnissa. (2015). Väkiluvun kehitys Lapin kunnissa ja seutukunnissa 1970–2015 viiden vuoden välein tarkasteltuna. Accessed 26 June 2018.
  58. Yle news 26.6.2018. (2018). Sipilä seeks commitment from gov’t partners after healthcare reform delays. Accessed 26 June 2018.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Social SciencesTampere UniversityTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations