Abstract
Comparative research on Asian societies is a challenging endeavor. There are at least three
challenges involved. One is the challenge of framing in order to set up the questions to be addressed. The
different social backgrounds in Asia compared to Europe and North America require different framing.
The second is the challenge of theory which means the difficulty of developing adequate theories that
capture the social realities of the region. The third issue is the challenge of data, or the lack of data that
lends itself to international comparison. Comparative study of care regimes in Asia initially reveals that
care in Asia is framed in relation to the quantity and quality of population as the basis of national power.
Secondly, theory that deals only with policy does not suffice because the welfare state is not sufficiently
developed in this region. It must be expanded to include the family, the market and the community as
well, forming the care diamond framework. Thirdly, it is difficult to gather governmental statistics which
are comparable to each other, so the best way to quantify care would be to use time, based on Time Use
Surveys. Another challenge in theory involves the direction of change. The distinction between the two
pathwaysof de-familialization, namely de-familialization by the state and de-familialization through
the market is particularly important in the Asian context. A theoretical framework that uses the four
quadrants created by the two directions of de-familialization will be applied i. The possible transition of
socialist countries to welfare states can also be covered in this framework.
