Findings

Table 3 shows that the included studies were almost all from high-income countries. The evidence is dominated by studies from the USA (n = 27) and the UK (N = 15).

Table 3

Geographical focus of included studies

Country	Number
United States of America	27
United Kingdom	15
Australia	5
Canada	2
Netherlands	3
Spain	2
Republic of Ireland	2
China	1
Israel	1
Norway	1
Germany	1
France	1
Italy	1
Mexico	1
Europe	2
International	2
Unspecified/Unclear	2

The content of the papers was diverse with some discussing issues for multiple demographic groups. The greatest number of articles discussed ‘social inequalities’ and volunteering (n = 34), followed by ‘age’ (n = 27), ‘religion’ (n = 15), ‘ethnicity’ (n = 15), ‘gender’ (n = 15), and then ‘disability’ (n = 7) and ‘relationship status’ (n = 3). No literature was identified in relation to ‘sexual orientation’ or ‘pregnancy/maternity’ and volunteering, although three papers discussed having children in the household and volunteering. This may reflect a dearth of evidence in these areas rather than a lack of barriers to volunteering for these groups. The largest number of papers (n = 33) carried out secondary analysis of existing quantitative survey data. Eleven papers utilised a review methodology, ranging from narrative reviews to meta-analysis. Twenty-three papers collected empirical data, including quantitative data (n = 9), qualitative data (n = 7), and mixed methods (n = 7). Mapping the methodologies used to explore barriers to volunteering for different demographic groups (see Table 4) illustrates the reliance to date on survey methodologies and a relative dearth of qualitative and mixed-methods empirical evidence. Contrary to this general pattern is the experience of people with disabilities (broadly defined) who have been the subject of relatively more qualitative and mixed-methods research and little survey analysis.

Table 4

Matrix of demographic descriptor and methodology for included papers

	Review method	Secondary survey analysis	Qualitative (empirical)	Quantitative (empirical)	Mixed methods (empirical)
Age	5	8	1	6	7
Disability	3		2		2
Gender		10	1	2	2
Relationship status		3
Pregnancy/maternity
Ethnicity	2	9		2	2
Religion	2	12	1
Sexual orientation
Social inequalities	7	20	2	2	3
Mixed			1

The identified papers described a range of barriers affecting volunteering for different demographic groups. Table 5 maps the identified barriers to volunteering to the different demographic groups. It demonstrates the breadth of potential issues for different groups but not the volume or quality of identified evidence. Some groups, such as ‘age’, ‘disability’, and ‘gender’, appear to experience a broader range of barriers to volunteering.

Table 5

Identified potential barriers to volunteering including crosscutting themes, by demographic group

Demographic groups	Socialisation		Institutional factors				Personal resources
	Parental/peer support	Social justice/pro-social values	Volunteer management	Access to opportunities	Stigmatising/exclusionary context	Lack of appropriate support	Skills, qualifications	Time	Financial cost	Health/physical functioning	Transportation	Social connections
Age (young people)	X	X		X	X		X	X	X
Age (older people)			X	X	X		X	X	X	X	X
Disability			X	X	X	X	X
Gender (men)		X						X
Gender (women)				X			X	X				X
Pregnancy/maternity
Ethnicity				X	X	X	X		X
Relationship status
Religion					X
Sexual identity

Demographic groups	View of volunteering			Caring responsibilities				Employment			Social exclusion
	Poor perception	Knowledge volunteering/roles	Different conceptualisation	Domestic responsibilities	Caring roles	Not having children	Not being married	F/T employment	Not in F/T employment	Employer support	Lack of social capital	Lack of cultural capital	Lack of economic capital	Lack of human capital
Age (young people)	X										**Potential crosscutting barriers for all groups**
Age (older people)		X			X
Disability		X
Gender (men)	X						X		X
Gender (women)				X	X			X		X
Pregnancy/maternity						X
Ethnicity	X		X
Relationship status							X
Religion
Sexual identity

Among older people, poor health and physical functioning, poverty, stigma, lack of skills, poor transport, time constraints, inadequate volunteer management, and other caring responsibilities are highlighted in the identified literature as potential barriers to volunteering. For younger people, a lack of institutional support and not being socialised into volunteering roles are barriers identified in the literature. The literature also indicates that younger people may have negative perceptions of volunteering, as well as not having time to volunteer. A significant barrier to volunteering for people with a disability can be the disablist attitudes of others, including a stigma associated with impairment and perceptions that people with a disability have very little to offer or that supporting someone with a disability to volunteer will be too resource intensive. Some people with a disability may themselves express concerns about participating outside of ‘safe’ spaces and may sometimes require additional skills development to take part in volunteering. Men and women may have different motivations for volunteering and all identified barriers to volunteering appear to have a gender element. The identified papers suggest women are required to devote a greater proportion of their ‘free time’ in order to volunteer than men. Women are constrained to a greater extent than men by housework and additional caring responsibilities (for children and elderly relatives) and are likely to receive less support from employers. No research on volunteering and pregnancy/maternity (or paternity) was found in this review, although having (school aged) children in the household was found to be positively associated with both formal and informal volunteering in three identified papers and in survey data. Raising children may make parents more aware of volunteering opportunities (i.e. through schools and youth groups/activities) and may create a societal expectation to socialise children into socially responsible roles. The papers suggest that different cultures may think about and value volunteering differently. People from minority ethnic groups may also experience limited access to volunteering infrastructures, feel alienated or excluded within volunteer organisations and environments, have fewer skills and resources to volunteer, and experience fewer positive outcomes from volunteering. The papers discussing volunteering and relationship (marital) status generally suggest a positive relationship between marriage and volunteering. However, a changing backdrop of family structures may be affecting the relationship between marriage and volunteering, particularly for women in terms of paid employment, having fewer children and having additional family care responsibilities. The identified literature focuses on heterosexual marriage, and no literature was identified specifically in relation to same-sex marriage or civil partnership. Church (or equivalent) attendance, in particular, is an influential factor in volunteering, possibly creating larger social networks and more opportunities to engage in volunteering, although the relationship to volunteering varies between religious affiliations. Some of the identified research warns that religion may form exclusionary boundaries around who can volunteer and what kind of activities are undertaken. Factors related to broader exclusionary processes and social, human, cultural, and economic capital have been identified in the research literature as key to participation in volunteering. The literature suggests that whilst volunteering is a mechanism for individuals to boost their personal, social, financial, and cultural resources in order to overcome exclusion, volunteering also consumes one’s resources. This means that those with less personal and social resources are less able to volunteer and gain the associated benefits.

Whilst different demographic groups may experience unique barriers to volunteering, the review highlighted areas of commonality. For example, both older people (Hussein and Manthorpe Reference Hussein and Manthorpe2014) and those with disabilities (Farrell and Bryant Reference Farrell and Bryant2009; Fegan and Cook Reference Fegan and Cook2012; Roker et al. Reference Roker, Player and Coleman1998; Trembath et al. Reference Trembath, Balandin, Stancliffe and Togher2010) experienced their volunteering being limited to specific roles and/or organisations. Moreover, barriers to volunteering associated with specific demographic groups were compounded (and/or mitigated) by multiple socio-economic factors. For example, the barriers to volunteering experienced by different age groups were found to be affected by the gender, ethnicity, disability, socio-economic status, family background, and education of potential volunteers (Cramm and Nieboer Reference Cramm and Nieboer2015; Kay and Bradbury Reference Kay and Bradbury2009; Mainar et al. Reference Mainar, Servós and Gil2015; McNamara and Gonzales Reference McNamara and Gonzales2011; Nicol Reference Nicol2012; Pantea Reference Pantea2013). A narrative account is now given of the main crosscutting factors affecting volunteering identified through the review.

Socialisation

The influence of socialisation on volunteering is most notably documented with regard to young people. Norms and values gained from friends and family help to explain why some people volunteer and others do not (Davis Smith Reference Davis Smith1999; Ishizawa Reference Ishizawa2015). Parents and friends who do not volunteer (Mainar et al. Reference Mainar, Servós and Gil2015; van Goethem et al. Reference van Goethem, van Hoof, van Aken, Orobio de Castro and Raaijmakers2014), do not hold strong social justice values (Webber Reference Webber2011), or do not see volunteering as part as their identity (Marta and Pozzi Reference Marta and Pozzi2008) are likely to dissuade youth volunteering. Individuals are also influenced by their social environments across the life course, including norms, values, customs, and habits, which all affect volunteering behaviour (Davis Smith Reference Davis Smith1999; Ishizawa Reference Ishizawa2015; McNamara and Gonzales Reference McNamara and Gonzales2011; Youssim et al. Reference Youssim, Hank and Litwin2015). For example, being religious may encourage volunteering through the teaching of obligation (Son and Wilson Reference Son and Wilson2012), whilst the process of teaching children socially responsible roles may encourage parents to volunteer (Taniguchi Reference Taniguchi2006).

Institutional Factors

The volunteering of different demographic groups also appears to be affected, to varying degrees, by the organisation and conduct of volunteer-involving organisations. Poor volunteer management has been found to be a barrier to volunteering for older people (Fengyan et al. Reference Fengyan, Morrow-Howell and Songiee2009) and men (Kolnick and Mulder Reference Kolnick and Mulder2007). Access to volunteering opportunities can be a barrier to volunteering. Clear entry points into volunteering and institutional support (i.e. school, church, community groups) are key facilitators for young people to volunteer (Webber Reference Webber2011). Similarly, those from minority ethnic groups may have limited access to formal volunteer infrastructures (Rotolo and Wilson Reference Rotolo and Wilson2014). Volunteering might also be organised to take place in unfamiliar, alienating, or non-inclusive environments. Older people (Connolly and O’shea Reference Connolly and O’shea2015; Suanet et al. Reference Suanet, Broese van Groenou and Braam2009), people with physical and/or intellectual impairments (Farrell and Bryant Reference Farrell and Bryant2009; Fegan and Cook Reference Fegan and Cook2012; Roker et al. Reference Roker, Player and Coleman1998), young people (Davis Smith Reference Davis Smith1999), and people from minority ethnic groups (Bortree and Waters Reference Bortree and Waters2014; Ockenden Reference Ockenden2007) have all reported not feeling welcome as volunteers within volunteer-involving organisations. Within voluntary roles, individuals may not receive appropriate support, discouraging them from volunteering further. Commitment to volunteers with a disability may be viewed as additional work (Roker et al. Reference Roker, Player and Coleman1998) and therefore a low service priority for organisations with limited time and resources (Young and Passmore Reference Young and Passmore2007). The availability of institutional support helps to explain why some young people volunteer and others do not (Davis Smith Reference Davis Smith1999; Ishizawa Reference Ishizawa2015).

The church (or other religious equivalent), for example, is an often discussed institution in the volunteering literature. Church attendance has been found to be an influential factor in volunteering (Layton and Moreno Reference Layton and Moreno2014; Storm Reference Storm2015), creating larger social networks, and more opportunities for interaction and the acquisition of social and administrative skills involved in civic engagement/volunteering. However, the relationship is contingent on other factors, including religion and denomination. In the United States of America (USA), for example, volunteering has been found to be more strongly tied to attendance at black and evangelical churches compared to those who attend Catholic and mainline protestant churches (Johnston Reference Johnston2013; Wilson and Janoski Reference Wilson and Janoski1995). Within African-American communities in the USA, the church may have a more mobilising effect for volunteering than in ‘white’ communities (Musick et al. Reference Musick, Wilson and Bynum2000). In the UK, some researches have found that religious ‘pluralists’—those who believe religions other than their own contain some basic truths—are more likely to volunteer than any other groups of religious people (Birdwell and Littler Reference Birdwell and Littler2012). Moreover, whilst facilitating access to voluntary opportunities for some, the church can also form exclusionary boundaries around voluntary activity (Pathak and McGhee Reference Pathak and McGhee2015).

Personal Resources

Individuals’ personal resources have been found to be a barrier and/or an enabling factor towards volunteering. Participating in volunteering requires an individual investment of time, money, effort, and skill (i.e. for travel, expenses). Lack of time, for various reasons, has been found to be a barrier to volunteering for young people (Davis Smith Reference Davis Smith1999; Mainar et al. Reference Mainar, Servós and Gil2015; Nicol Reference Nicol2012) and both men and women; women may devote a greater proportion of their ‘free time’ to volunteering (Taniguchi Reference Taniguchi2006; Windebank Reference Windebank2008). Lack of financial resources to cover the costs associated with volunteering has been found to be a barrier for older people (Cattan et al. Reference Cattan, Hogg and Hardill2011; Fengyan et al. Reference Fengyan, Morrow-Howell and Songiee2009), young people (Davis Smith Reference Davis Smith1999; Mainar et al. Reference Mainar, Servós and Gil2015; Nicol Reference Nicol2012), and people from minority ethnic groups (Mesch et al. Reference Mesch, Rooney, Steinberg and Denton2006; Musick et al. Reference Musick, Wilson and Bynum2000). Some people may not be able to take part in volunteering due to ill health. This has been found to be the case among older people, where poor health and physical functioning negatively correlates with volunteering (Cramm and Nieboer Reference Cramm and Nieboer2015; Lum and Lightfoot Reference Lum and Lightfoot2005). Older people (Fengyan et al. Reference Fengyan, Morrow-Howell and Songiee2009), young people (Bang Reference Bang2015; Davis Smith Reference Davis Smith1999), people with physical and/or intellectual impairments (Young and Passmore Reference Young and Passmore2007), women (Bryant et al. Reference Bryant, Jeon-Slaughter, Kang and Tax2003; Einolf Reference Einolf2011), and people from minority ethnic groups (Mesch et al. Reference Mesch, Rooney, Steinberg and Denton2006; Musick et al. Reference Musick, Wilson and Bynum2000) all face barriers to volunteering when they are perceived as lacking the desired skills for volunteer roles.

Understanding of Volunteering

The identified papers indicate that different demographic groups may think about and conceptualise volunteering differently, affecting their propensity to volunteer. Older people may lack knowledge around volunteer opportunities and roles (Fengyan et al. Reference Fengyan, Morrow-Howell and Songiee2009). Other groups, including young people (Davis Smith Reference Davis Smith1999) and people with physical and/or intellectual impairments (Balandin et al. Reference Balandin, Llewellyn, Dew, Ballin and Schneider2006), may hold negative views about volunteering. People from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds may also view volunteering differently. For example, African-American populations are less likely to see ‘charity’ as the best way to address social problems (Musick et al. Reference Musick, Wilson and Bynum2000). In Chinese and Japanese cultures, older people may be less inclined to volunteer because of the implication that they are not being appropriately cared for by their family (Fengyan et al. Reference Fengyan, Morrow-Howell and Songiee2009; Warburton and Winterton Reference Warburton and Winterton2010).

Caring Responsibilities

Family structures and the way caring (and domestic) responsibilities are divided within households have been shown to impact volunteering. In general, marriage (McNamara and Gonzales Reference McNamara and Gonzales2011; Plagnol and Huppert Reference Plagnol and Huppert2010; Taniguchi Reference Taniguchi2006) and the presence of children (Einolf Reference Einolf2011; McNamara and Gonzales Reference McNamara and Gonzales2011; Taniguchi Reference Taniguchi2006)—particularly of school age—in the household have been found to correlate with parents’ volunteering. Parents are thought to be ‘plugged into volunteering activities’ through school and youth activities (McNamara and Gonzales Reference McNamara and Gonzales2011, p. 500). Domestic and family responsibilities are a barrier to women’s volunteering more than men’s (Einolf Reference Einolf2011; Fyall and Gazley Reference Fyall and Gazley2015; Taniguchi Reference Taniguchi2006; Windebank Reference Windebank2008). However, changing family structures (i.e. away from the ‘nuclear family’) and gender roles with regard to employment may be adversely affecting the relationship between volunteering and marriage, particularly for women (Ogunye and Parker Reference Ogunye and Parker2015) and for older people expected to take on greater caring roles (Fengyan et al. Reference Fengyan, Morrow-Howell and Songiee2009). Tiehen (Reference Tiehen2000) also finds that where married women are having fewer children, they may be less exposed to volunteering opportunities.

Employment

Conditions around employment have been found to affect volunteering of men and women in different ways. Men may be more likely to volunteer when they are in (full-time) employment (Fyall and Gazley Reference Fyall and Gazley2015; Taniguchi Reference Taniguchi2006), whereas women who do not work or who work part-time have been found to be far more likely to volunteer both formally and informally (Helms and McKenzie Reference Helms and McKenzie2014). Women may be less likely than male colleagues to receive employer support for volunteering (MacPhail and Bowles Reference MacPhail and Bowles2009). In the USA, increases in paid employment (Tiehen Reference Tiehen2000) and additional family care responsibilities (Taniguchi Reference Taniguchi2006) may be a barrier to female volunteering.

Social Exclusion

The review has so far highlighted a range of barriers that may affect the capacity of different groups to volunteer. The final theme is how the unequal distribution of social, human, and economic capital resources profoundly affects volunteering. Studies conducting regression analyses of data from the USA (Lee and Brudney Reference Lee and Brudney2012; Wilson and Musick Reference Wilson and Musick1998), Canada (Smith Reference Smith2012), Israel (Youssim et al. Reference Youssim, Hank and Litwin2015), Italy (Marta and Pozzi Reference Marta and Pozzi2008), and Spain (Mainar et al. Reference Mainar, Servós and Gil2015) all point to factors associated with broader exclusionary mechanisms—social, economic, and human capital—being significant influences on volunteering.

There is a growing body of evidence demonstrating a significant positive relationship between social capital—the ‘ability of actors to secure benefits by virtue of membership in social networks’ (Portes Reference Portes1998, p. 6)—and philanthropic behaviour, including volunteering (Forbes and Zampelli Reference Forbes and Zampelli2014; Layton and Moreno Reference Layton and Moreno2014; Zhuang and Girginov Reference Zhuang and Girginov2012). People or groups with low levels of social capital may be less likely to volunteer because they may have less contact with diverse people or organisations that provide opportunities for volunteering (Cramm and Nieboer Reference Cramm and Nieboer2015; Forbes and Zampelli Reference Forbes and Zampelli2014; Lee and Brudney Reference Lee and Brudney2012; Wilson and Musick Reference Wilson and Musick1998). The effects of social capital may be compounded by other factors such as education, being religious, and family background (Lee and Brudney Reference Lee and Brudney2012). A linked concept is ‘cultural capital’, with the ability to ‘act’ in a given social context in order to identify and avail volunteering opportunities transmitted from one generation to another within social groups (Youssim et al. Reference Youssim, Hank and Litwin2015).

A positive relationship between individuals’ level of education and skills—human capital—and volunteering has been observed in the USA (Forbes and Zampelli Reference Forbes and Zampelli2014; Ishizawa Reference Ishizawa2014; Mesch et al. Reference Mesch, Rooney, Steinberg and Denton2006; Wilson and Musick Reference Wilson and Musick1998), Canada (Smith Reference Smith2012), mainland Europe (Plagnol and Huppert Reference Plagnol and Huppert2010), and Germany (Helms and McKenzie Reference Helms and McKenzie2014). Higher human capital is thought to enable individuals to make better use of their social networks in order to identify and utilise opportunities for volunteering (Wilson and Musick Reference Wilson and Musick1998), whereas a lack of human capital may reduce individuals’ ambition and expectations of their own participation in volunteering (Brodie et al. Reference Brodie, Hughes, Jochum, Miller, Ockenden and Warburton2011).

Finally, economic capital has been linked to volunteering prevalence (Berliner Reference Berliner2013; Hussein and Manthorpe Reference Hussein and Manthorpe2014; Plagnol and Huppert Reference Plagnol and Huppert2010; Taniguchi Reference Taniguchi2006; Wilson and Musick Reference Wilson and Musick1998). Higher income may allow more discretionary spending and afford people a greater stake in society (Wilson and Musick Reference Wilson and Musick1998). Those with higher incomes may also have a higher social network density, creating more opportunities to volunteer. Conversely, for those lacking in economic capital, volunteering might be a luxury they cannot—literally and figuratively—afford (Berliner Reference Berliner2013; Plagnol and Huppert Reference Plagnol and Huppert2010; Taniguchi Reference Taniguchi2006).

Limitations and Future Research

This review is not a comprehensive account of the barriers to volunteering, rather an overview of some pertinent issues and themes. Limited time and resource meant restrictions had to be placed on the breadth and depth of searching. There is a need for a comprehensive systematic review of the available evidence concerning barriers and facilitators to volunteering and their effects on and pathways to reducing social and health inequalities.

The review has drawn on evidence from a global perspective, as the intention was to provide a broad overview of the barriers to volunteering. The evidence in this review comes mostly from high-income countries, specifically the USA and UK, and so may not be relevant to medium- or low-income countries. This is not entirely surprising given documented publication bias towards the USA in the literature more generally (Yeung Reference Yeung2001). It is not clear the extent to which international studies can be synthesised when issues around volunteering are often dependent on social and cultural context, although there do appear to be shared issues. Further primary research and secondary data analysis of the barriers to volunteering in demographic groups on a country-by-country basis would be beneficial to confirm these findings.

Although a significant body of literature exists concerning volunteering and inequalities, there are gaps in our understanding of the barriers that particular demographic groups may experience. No research was identified exploring either pregnancy and/or maternity/paternity or sexual orientation and barriers to volunteering. The majority of the identified literature in relation to ethnicity or religion and volunteering was from a non-UK context. The literature concerning relationship status and volunteering exclusively focused on heterosexual marriage. Further primary research and secondary data analysis of volunteering patterns in relation to sexual orientation and disability would be beneficial in bridging current gaps in knowledge.