# A Systematic Literature Review of Au Pairing: Insights From the Path

Marco Rocca, Catharina Lopes Scodro

► To cite this version:

Marco Rocca, Catharina Lopes Scodro. A Systematic Literature Review of Au Pairing: Insights From the Path. Central European Academy Law Review, 2024, 2 (1), pp.29 - 47. 10.62733/2024.1.29-47. hal-05166106

HAL Id: hal-05166106

https://hal.science/hal-05166106v1

Submitted on 16 Jul 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Marco ROCCA* – Catharina LOPES SCODRO**

# A Systematic Literature Review of Au Pairing: Insights From the Path***

**ABSTRACT:** Different definitions of Empirical Legal Studies (ELS) have, at their core, the systematisation of legal data. The systematic literature review (SLR) is a technique that can be used in the scope of ELS, to collect and analyse all relevant studies of a given topic. To this end, SLR employs a staged procedure to increase the transparency of the research being performed and to present it coherently. This technique plays a major role in exploring subjects which are underexplored and undertheorised, as well as when lacking official data. In this paper, we present an SLR focusing on the definition of au pairs in the scientific literature. Au pairing is one of the most frequent forms of care provision in Europe. However, the inclusion of au pairs' mobility under the definition of 'labour migration' for the purpose of care provision is still debated, leaving the phenomenon in a grey area. This can impact both the social and labour rights of au pairs. On this basis, we identify the need to investigate the au pairing phenomenon through a legal approach, grounded in a multi-disciplinary perspective. In this context, we present our protocol for a systematic literature review, composed of five steps on top of the definition of the research design (Step 0); Search protocol (Step 1); Non-relevance criteria and duplicates (Step 2); Relevance criteria (Step 3); Analysis (Step 4); Coding (Step 5). The development of this approach is part of a broader research, representing one of its conceptual foundations.

<footnote>* Permanent Researcher, CNRS – University of Strasbourg (UMR7354 DRES). Principal Investigator of the European Birds of Passage project (ERC Starting Grant, 2022-2027). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0756-6616. Contact: mrocca@unistra.fr</footnote>

<footnote>** PhD candidate in Social Law, CNRS – University of Strasbourg (UMR7354 DRES, France). Researcher at the European Birds of Passage project (ERC Starting Grant, 2022-2027). MSc., University of São Paulo (Law School of Ribeirão Preto, Brazil). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7257-7632. Contact: catharina.lopes-scodro@etu.unistra.fr</footnote>

<footnote>*** The research leading to this article is funded by the European Union (ERC, E-BoP - European Birds of Passage - An Empirical Legal Theory of Temporary Labour Migration in Europe, grant agreement No. 101041246). Views and opinions expressed are however those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Council Executive Agency. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. This essay has been submitted to a double-blind peer review.</footnote>
**KEYWORDS:** *empirical legal studies, systematic literature review, labour law, European labour law, temporary labour migration, au pairs.*

1.

Introduction

The debate concerning the ways in which legal research can investigate its relation-
ship with 'society' is not a new one<fnref n="1" />. Such a relationship is necessarily bilateral: the
forces of society shape legal frameworks, institutions, and representations, and are
at the same time influenced by them. Different branches of legal scholarship have
developed to investigate this perpetual two-way movement, going under the various
labels of Socio-Legal Research, Empirical Legal Studies, and Law and Society.

Despite their specificities, these approaches are connected by their focus on studying the legal phenomenon in the real-world, and on developing ways in which to explore this object. Notably, this implies going beyond the doctrinal approach<fnref n="2" />, intended as a hermeneutic discipline based on the interpretation of specific documents<fnref n="3" />. To do so, researchers have had to recourse to a variety of methods, using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods approaches. In the context of this article, we shall focus on those developed under the (broad) umbrella of 'Empirical Legal Studies' (ELS).

Epstein and Martin<fnref n="4" /> define ELS as “research based on observations of the world or data, which is just a term for facts about the world.” Data can be words (e.g. legal decisions), number (e.g. statistical values), or images, without a hierarchy between them as to which one is “more ‘empirical’”<fnref n="5" />. Likewise, Cane and Kritzer<fnref n="6" /> highlight how empirical legal research deals with “the systematic collection of information (‘data’) and its analysis according to some generally accepted method.” Thus, the systematic collection and treatment of data are at the core of ELS. These systematised processes can be developed in various ways. For instance, the analysis can be through “simple counting, sophisticated statistical manipulation, grouping into like sets, identification of sequences (in some circumstances called ‘process tracing’), matching of patterns, or simple labelling of themes”<fnref n="7" />.

<footnote n="1">1 Tomlins, 2007.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 Banakar and Travers, 2005; Calavita, 2010; McConville and Chui, 2007.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">3 Van Hoecke, 2011, p. 4.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">4 Epstein and Martin, 2014, p. 14.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">5 Epstein and Martin, 2014, p. 14.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">6 Cane and Kritzer, 2012, p. 26.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">7 Cane and Kritzer, 2012, p. 26.</footnote>
Thus, ELS is characterised by a commitment to systemising research processes. This refers to the goal of analysing and presenting all the available data under a given scope, with said data being identified and filtered through a pre-defined set of criteria<fnref n="8" />. ELS pursues the general goals of collecting and summarising data, to make descriptive or causal inferences<fnref n="9" />. Collecting the data includes documenting the strategies of collection, supported by the idea of “the more data the better”<fnref n="10" />. In its turn, summarising the data means separating the relevant information from the useless (for the given research), as well as organising it coherently. This can be achieved through the creation of datasets, which can then be shared with the scientific community. On this basis, Epstein and King<fnref n="11" /> point to the goal of making descriptive or causal inferences, illustrating that “We do not make them by summarising facts; we make them by using facts we know to learn about facts we do not observe.” Its purpose is to go beyond sampling.

The systematic literature review (SLR) can be used to pursue these goals. Through a staged procedure, SLR is relevant for “mapping out areas of uncertainty, and identifying where little or no relevant research has been done, but where new studies are needed. Systematic reviews also flag up areas where spurious certainty abounds”<fnref n="12" />. It is designed to avoid a haphazard and non-reproductible data collection (in our case, the literature review), reviewing what has already been produced on a given subject in a controlled way. According to Petticrew and Roberts, “Systematic reviews are literature reviews that adhere closely to a set of scientific methods that explicitly aim to limit systematic error (bias), mainly by attempting to identify, appraise and synthesise all relevant studies (of whatever design) in order to answer a particular question (or set of questions).”<fnref n="13" />

This technique differs from other forms of literature review for its staged procedure, as well as for its purpose. In lieu of summarising ‘all’ that has been published of a topic, it intends to answer a question and/or test a hypothesis<fnref n="14" />. For that, the SLR can be explored in various ways, such as using statistical techniques to synthesise the results (meta-analysis) or delving descriptively into the results (narrative review)<fnref n="15" />. Chapman<fnref n="16" /> investigated the systematic literature review in the social sciences’ scientific literature. She highlighted how it is broadly used in medicine and health sciences, becoming more common in the social sciences. It is important to note that

<footnote n="8">8 Salehijam, 2018, p. 36.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">9 Epstein & King, 2002.</footnote>

<footnote n="10">10 Epstein and King, 2002, p. 24.</footnote>

<footnote n="11">11 Epstein and King, 2002, p. 29.</footnote>

<footnote n="12">12 Petticrew and Roberts 2006, p. 2.</footnote>

<footnote n="13">13 Petticrew and Roberts 2006, p. 9.</footnote>

<footnote n="14">14 Petticrew and Roberts 2006.</footnote>

<footnote n="15">15 Petticrew and Roberts 2006.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">16 Chapman, 2021.</footnote>
her work did not include legal research, which is indicative of the ever-debated place
of our discipline among the social sciences.

In summary, an SLR allows the collection of data through a staged procedure; controlling the biases of the study; recognising the limitations of the researcher; joining discussions and findings on a given topic. It plays a major role in subjects underexplored and undertheorised, as well when lacking official data.

Here we present the concrete application of the SLR to the phenomenon of au pairs<fnref n="17" />. This is part of a broader research on the relationship between labour law, temporary labour migration, and au pairing. In proposing this example we wish to highlight how the SLR can increase traceability and transparency, helping to recognise and present the limitations of a given study, and explore the relevant literature going beyond legal research. Therefore, while engaging with the content of the research in question, our aim is to focus on the functioning of the SLR in practice. In the remainder of this introduction, we will present the main subject. In Section 2 we focus on the various steps composing our protocol for the SLR. We also highlight the way in which we built our corpus and determined the relevance criteria. In Section 3 we present our interpretation of the results of the SLR. Section 4 is devoted to some final remarks concerning the SLR, and what we believe to be the added value it can bring to legal research, as well as pathways for future research emerging from our initial findings.

Au pairing is formally designed as a cultural exchange program, in which the
participants – the host family and the au pair – are inserted into a dynamic of offer-
ing and retribution<fnref n="18" />. The offering is based on accommodation, feeding, and ‘pocket
money’, whereas the retribution is based on caring for children – which can include
teaching languages, cleaning services, washing clothes, and cooking. Within this
multilingual environmental, the discourse surrounding au pairs defines them as part
of a cultural exchange, since they experience a different culture while (supposedly)
having the opportunity to be treated as a ‘family member’ in the country of arrival.

As for legal regulation, the 1969 *European Agreement on Au Pair Placement* (hereafter ‘the Agreement’) of the Council of Europe represents an important reference. This Agreement constituted an attempt to standardise the legal status within European countries, by defining the au pair who “belong[s] neither to the student category nor to the worker category but a special category.” The *Explanatory Report to the Agreement* provides clarifications and an interpretation of the document. It presents the previous work leading to the Agreement, such as the Motion for a *Recommendation on Au Pair Employment* (1964); the inclusion of the topic on ‘*Living and Working Conditions of Au Pair’ Girls’ in the 1966 Intergovernmental Work Programme,*

<footnote n="17">17 This is a French expression meaning ‘in pairs’. We do not use quotation marks or italics, since it is widely used in English.</footnote>

<footnote n="18">18 Cox, 2015; Lutz, 2002; Kofman, 2014; Ikaksen and Bikova, 2019.</footnote>
the adoption of a *Recommendation with Draft rules on Au Pair Employment* (1966), the preparation of a draft Convention (1967), and its discussion in the following years. Both the Motion of 1964 and the Recommendation of 1966 included the term 'Employment', which interestingly did not make it to the final versions of the *European Agreement on Au Pair Placement* and its *Explanatory Report*.

Almost fifty years later, EU Directive 2016/801 – commonly known as the Researchers and Students Directive – included au pairs in its scope as an optional category. It defines them as someone from a third country temporarily received by a family based in an EU member state, to improve their linguistic skills and knowledge of the country itself (Art. 3, 8). For that, au pairs must perform ‘light housework’ and provide childcare. This instrument innovates upon the Agreement of the Council of Europe, since – despite not being included in the definition – recognises that au pairs can be considered in an employment relationship or not. This differentiation has an impact on the rights of au pairs. Those considered to be in an employment relationship will be entitled to the right to equal treatment (Art. 12, Directive 2011/98). For those who are not, the application of this principle will be restricted to the access to/ supply of goods and services and, where applicable, to the recognition of diplomas, certificates, and other professional qualifications.

Definitions play a role in delineating the rights to which a category is entitled or not. In practice, au pairs commonly experience lack of rights and protection in several European countries, under the cover of being treated as a ‘family member’ <fnref n="19" />. This issue is compounded by the potential increase in the recourse to au pairs in EU member states, without reliable data on their quantity. This scenario is connected to rising demands for care work, border dynamics on labour migration schemes, and the differences in childcare provisions between welfare state regimes<fnref n="20" />.

## 2. The Path into Steps – our Protocol for Systematic Literature Review

In this section we will present the steps of the SLR, performed in the context of the research on au pairs. We organised the SLR in five steps, preceded by the designing of the research itself (*Step 0*), covering the identification of the research question(s), hypothesis(es), and methodology.

In the first step (*Step 1 – Search protocol*) we identified the relevant databases and the search queries – including the options used in the search. Regarding the

<footnote n="19">19 Cox, 2015; Rohde-Abuba, 2016; Ikaksen and Bikova, 2019; Hess and Puckhaber, 2004.</footnote>

<footnote n="20">20 OECD, et al, 2021; Hirata, 2002.</footnote>
databases, we worked with those available at our institution at the date of submission of the query (30 January 2023). Indeed, noting the date of the query itself is a necessary part of the protocol which allows us to explain potential discrepancies with replications in the future. We selected the relevant databases according to the discipline. As our study was designed to be multi-disciplinary – to investigate a legal phenomenon through the lens of different social sciences – we selected databases for Law, Political Sciences and Europe, and Social Sciences.

Our library provided the list of available databases for each discipline, organised by available content.

<table><caption>Table 1: Available databases – University of Strasbourg (Jan 2023), by discipline</caption><thead><tr><th>Law</th><th>Political Sciences and Europe</th><th>Social Sciences</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="3">Dictionaries and encyclopaedias</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>L'International Encyclopedia of Political Science</td><td>eHraf WORLD CULTURE</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3">Articles of academic journals and book chapters</td></tr><tr><td>Dalloz.fr</td><td>Cairn</td><td>Cairn</td></tr><tr><td>Dalloz Revues</td><td>Open Edition Journals</td><td>Open Edition Journals</td></tr><tr><td>Ledoctrinal</td><td>Persée</td><td>Persée</td></tr><tr><td>Lamyline</td><td>Jstor</td><td>Isidore</td></tr><tr><td>Lexis360</td><td>SpringerLink</td><td>Jstor</td></tr><tr><td>Lextenso.fr</td><td>Sage Journals</td><td>SOCINDEX</td></tr><tr><td>La base Navis</td><td>Wiley Online Library</td><td>Sociological Abstracts</td></tr><tr><td>Stradalex Europe</td><td>ScienceDirect</td><td>Social Services Abstracts</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Stradalex Europe</td><td>Sage Journals</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>Wiley Online Library</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>ScienceDirect</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>Proquest Sociology</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>Humanities International Complete</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>SpringerLink</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3">E-books</td></tr><tr><td>Cairn</td><td>DALLOZ Bibliothèque</td><td>OpenEdition Books</td></tr><tr><td>La bibliothèque</td><td>Espace mondial, l'Atlas</td><td>l'Harmathèque</td></tr><tr><td>numérique Dalloz</td><td>OpenEdition Books</td><td>ScholarVox by Cyberlibris</td></tr><tr><td>La base Navis</td><td>l'Harmathèque</td><td>Dawsonera</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3">PhD Theses and Dissertations</td></tr><tr><td>Theses.fr</td><td>Theses.fr</td><td>Theses.fr</td></tr><tr><td>Thèses-Unistra</td><td>Thèses-Unistra</td><td>Dumas</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>Thèses-Unistra</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source: Own elaboration.
On this basis, we identified the databases to gather materials in the form of articles of academic journals, book chapters, and e-books. Eleven common databases in the disciplines of Law, Political Sciences and Europe, and Social Sciences were identified (Cairn; Stradalex Europe; Sage Journals; OpenEdition Books; Jstor; l'Harmathèque; OpenEdition Journals; ScienceDirect; Persée; SpringerLink; Wiley Online Library). Due to the number of available databases, we performed several test queries in order to define which one would be used.

Tests were run with different combinations – “Au pair + Work”; “Au pair + Migration”; “Au pair + Europe”; “Au pairing”. In the end, we chose to run our tests with the expression “Au pair*”, in order to avoid biases related to the field of the research. The asterisk was used to cover the variations of the last word (i.e. au pairs, au pairing, etc.). This test had no temporal delimitation. Results were restricted to the content for which our institution provided access, and the term had to appear in the text of the source. We excluded the databases which did not allow for a sufficient granularity in the filters – for example, when the journals were presented without the articles and when there were no filters to indicate directly if we would have access to the full text.

These tests were fundamental to define the selected databases – Sage Journals, Jstor, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink – and the search queries to be used. Ultimately, we used the expression “Au pair*” (with quotation marks and asterisk), which had to be in the full text; the results had to be published from June 1953 to June 2023; the content was restricted to what we could access with our institutional login; the results were restricted by language (English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese) and format (articles, reviews, books, book chapters, or research reports). This resulted in our first corpus, comprising 2157 items (R).

In our second step (Step 2 – Non-relevance criteria and duplicates) we defined what was not relevant, what was a duplicate, and which duplicates were included or excluded from the data collection (and the criteria for this inclusion/exclusion). In this sense, we submitted the results (R) to two filters: the first (R1) was to identify the non-relevant content, and the second (R2) to eliminate the duplicates.

Therefore, the results (R) were filtered without an analysis of a sample of the content, being based only on the title and the journal (in the case of articles) or on the title of the book (in the case of book chapters or reviews). The purpose was to identify the field of the study, as well as to reduce the number of items by excluding apparent mismatches. This step was necessary since we identified the use of the expression “Au pair” in publications of Linguistics, Literature, Biology, and Chemistry, for example, with different meanings (e.g. the position of molecules/components in pairs). This was a cursory analysis by design, so we included the items where the reading of the title (and publishing journal, where applicable) was not sufficient to evaluate them. This filtering (R1) resulted in 481 items.
These materials were filtered one more time (R2), to remove duplicates. A 'duplicate' was identified in the following cases: (a) when there was more than one item in the results, with the same title and the same author(s), in the same journal, and published in the same year; (b) when there was more than one book, with the same title, the same author(s), and the same publisher or the same year. Also, when there was more than one chapter from the same book, with the same author(s), we excluded the individual chapters and included the whole book as a single item. This filtering (R2) resulted in a corpus of 440 items, which included publications by the same author(s) and similar subject, but in different outlets and/or years. These are publications presented the same dataset but exploring different research questions<fnref n="21" />. We opted to include these items separately in our corpus, on the basis of the different aspects of the phenomenon which might have been investigating.

In the third step (Step 3 – Relevance criteria) we filtered the results based on the definition of the criteria for inclusion or exclusion of materials. In contrast with R1 (Step 2), we performed a more in-depth analysis of the content to refine it based on thematic pertinence. We analysed it through reading the abstract and, when absent, the introduction, in order to identify the research question(s), goals, and methodology.

In our corpus, we included the introduction and editorials for thematic or special issues of scientific journals. These materials usually explore the main discussions of the published articles. The purpose of including them was to achieve articles with thematic pertinence in relation to the research, which, eventually, had not been captured in our research in the databases. We decided to include them in order to make our final corpus more robust, by capturing (in a systematised way) as many sources caught in our data collection as possible. Ultimately, we had two introductions/editorials of special or thematic issues of scientific journals in our corpus, which led to the inclusion of four journal articles.

A similar procedure was performed with book reviews. These can be used to include entire books or book chapters with thematic pertinence, which had not been captured via the query. Despite this, we ultimately discarded the 21 book reviews on the basis of the previous steps, and, as a consequence, no further books and book chapters were included through this method.

At the end of Step 2, our corpus included 123 items.

<footnote n="21">21 For example: Geserick 2012, 2016; Dalgas 2016a, 2016b; Búriková 2016, 2019; Eldén and Anving 2016, 2019a, 2019b, 2022.</footnote>
<table><caption>Table 2: Results and filtering during the SLR</caption><thead><tr><th>Date of data collection</th><th>Database</th><th>Results (R)</th><th>Results (R1)</th><th>Results (R2)</th><th>Results (R3)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>20 Jul 2023</td><td>Sage Journals</td><td>33</td><td>20</td><td rowspan="4">440</td><td rowspan="4">123</td></tr><tr><td>21 Jul 2023</td><td>Jstor</td><td>1251</td><td>305</td></tr><tr><td>20 Jul 2023</td><td>ScienceDirect</td><td>506</td><td>36</td></tr><tr><td>21 Jul 2023</td><td>SpringerLink</td><td>367</td><td>120</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">Total</td><td>2157</td><td>481</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

Source: Own elaboration.

Afterwards, we proceeded with our fourth step (Step 4 – Analysis), in order to perform an in-depth analysis of each item of the corpus. This in-depth analysis comprised the reading and systematising of the comparable content in a table. This table included technical information on each item (database where it was found, the reference, year of the publication, format, and URL), as well as the comparable content. A SLR can be used to identify different comparable contents, which will be determined by the subject and the research design, since the goal and the research questions will guide what the researcher(s) need to look for. In our case, we wanted to explore a) definition and adjacent concepts of au pairing; b) flows (through the identification of au pairs’ countries of origin and arrival); c) indications of the quantity of au pairs in the country of arrival; d) the methodology of the study; and e) discussions of regulation, social rights, and migration status of au pairs.

These columns were constructed based on exploratory research that indicated gaps in the literature in relation to data on au pairing. We found that few countries publicise their data regarding visas for au pairs, since some of them do not have a specific scheme. In the scope of the EU, capturing their number faces other obstacles related to the free movement of persons, since EU citizens do not need a visa to move to another EU member state<fnref n="22" />. Difficulties in collecting au pairs’ numbers are also connected with informal arrangements, for example the case of a non-EU au pair already present in a given country on the basis of a student visa. In this sense, the SLR enabled us to identify numbers regarding the quantity of au pairs, albeit in a fragmented way.

Another gap was the identification of au pairs’ flows. We identified that most of the studies on au pairing were based on a qualitative approach, notably based on interviews. Non-representative samples do not allow us to capture the quantity of people involved in their flows. Despite this, we traced au pairs’ flows that were more commonly analysed in the scientific literature.

<footnote n="22">22 Zwysen and Akgüç, 2023, p. 9.</footnote>
This data was collected based on the information available on the countries of origin and arrival, relying on primary or secondary sources. The more common data was gathered from interviews with au pairs, former au pairs, and their host families/ employers. We did not include countries of origin and arrival when au pairing was just mentioned without underlying data (e.g. "It is a common practice in the USA") or when the flow in question was only mentioned by reference to other research (in order to avoid double counting). We identified some items in which the direction of the flow of au pairs was mentioned, but referred to a different historical period. For example, McDowell²³ investigates the flux of Latvian migrant workers in the 1940s and 1950s for the UK, based on her data from 2000 and 2001.

Then, we proceeded with our final step (Step 5 – Coding), devoted to the interpretation of the comparable content, in order to group items into clusters. Since the corpus comprised long materials, the purpose was to reduce its content to units. These units can emerge from the data (in a grounded theory approach) or from a pre-established theoretical framework. They can be used to identify patterns (in a time period, for example) and the relationship between them, to enable the drawing of inferences. We present the codes and the results in the next section.

To close the present section, the following diagram summarises the five steps of our SLR.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>Diagram 1: Synthesis of the systematic literature review (protocol)</figcaption></figure>

Source: Own elaboration.
3.
Coding

In our fifth and final step (Step 5 – *Coding*), we applied a set of codes to items included in our corpus. This coding is based on what emerged from the data (in a grounded theory approach).<fnref n="24" /> In the present research, the procedure of creating codes was inspired by content analysis techniques<fnref n="25" />, focusing on words mentioned by the authors. On this basis, we created six units identifying how au pairs were defined. They are: mobility definition (M); work-related migration (WM); channel to improve skills (S); migrant domestic and care work (CW); childcare arrangement (CH); and undecided. These codes do not have any hierarchical purpose or pretention of exhaustiveness. The purpose was to organise them based on the description of the given arrangement.

After proceeding coding, we obtained the following results:

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Graph 1: Coding of our corpus</figcaption></figure>

Source: Own elaboration.

• Migrant domestic and care work definition (CW): The author(s) position(s) au pairing in the scope of transnational/internation migration for domestic and

<footnote n="24">24 The coding was refined on the basis of the feedback received in two occasions: "II Annual Scientific Conference of the Central European Academy" (Central European Academy – Budapest, September 2023) and "2023 Graduate Student Symposium: Critical Conversations in Work and Labour" (York University – Toronto, October 2023). We wish to thank all the participants to these events for their comments, feedback, and questions.</footnote>

<footnote n="25">25 Bardin, 2011.</footnote>
care work purposes. Thus, we applied this code when the phenomenon was situated in the context of care labour markets, in connection to migration dynamics. E.g.: "The liberalisation of the au pair law can be seen as a political recognition of the rising demand for migrant domestic workers in Austria"<fnref n="26" />. Domestic and care work encompasses services performed in or for a household (cleaning, caring, cooking etc.). In some situations, we identified the mention of remittances.

*   **Childcare arrangement definition (CH):** The author(s) mention(s) au pairing as a possible childcare arrangement (an option between nannies, childminders, etc.), without focusing on migration. We applied this code when the focus of the given item was on the provision/availability of care services, as well as on work-life balance and types and motivations of parents for choosing a modality of childcare service, without mentioning migration. For example, "Although their working conditions differ in some ways, nannies and au pairs both represent groups that are performing paid care work primarily centred on children in the private setting of a family home"<fnref n="27" />.

*   **Mobility definition (M):** We applied this code to the items where au pairing was presented as a general strategy of temporary mobility, which was not attached to a labour purpose. It was commonly described as a strategy for cultural exchange, so the publications mainly deal with some au pairs' motivations to have a gap year or being a stepping stone in their transition to adulthood. Therefore, we employed this code when the focus was the mobility *per se*, for example: "As Laura (25, MA, Northern Italy), who decided to become an au pair (in the UK) at the age of 18 due to the uncertainty of choosing the right university course, recalls, her mobility experience had the effect of 'weaning' her from her parents"<fnref n="28" />.

*   **Channel to improve skills definition (S):** These items present au pairing as a channel to improve and develop skills and acquire professional experiences in a different country. The skills/experience investigated deal mainly with languages and care activities. As such, these items focus on broadening labour market opportunities (in the country of origin or arrival). This code does not refer to the 'skilled' or 'unskilled' character of the activity performed by au pairs. Instead, it refers to the goal pursued by au pairs. As an illustration: "She used an au pair job only for learning English, then obtained an education as a nurse specialist in Norway, and then used this to obtain an interesting job at an English hospital"<fnref n="29" />.

<footnote n="26">26 Jandl, 2009, p. 121.</footnote>

<footnote n="27">27 Eldén and Anving 2016, p. 47.</footnote>

<footnote n="28">28 Grüning and Camozzi, 2023, p. 11.</footnote>

<footnote n="29">29 Christensen, 2020, p. 28.</footnote>
* Work-related migration definition (WM): These items present au pairing as a migration strategy, with the specific purpose of work. This link was identified, for example, in sending remittances. However, the items in this group do not focus on the role of au pairing in the context of domestic and care sector. Instead, they deal with borders and barriers to labour migration, and attempts to pursue long-term migration projects through au pairing. As an illustration, "Temporary contracts for au-pairs providing short-term residence permission in their first country of immigration led the nurses to seek further alternatives for staying abroad" <fnref n="30" /> and "However, like Gil, many also engage in au pairing as part of longer-term migration processes." <fnref n="31" />.

* Undecided: This code was included when we reached different conclusions, without a unified position regarding the given item.

Following the coding, we identified that the majority of the items concentrated in the definitions that recognised the provision of care as a goal. This provides an indication of how au pairing is considered in the literature, notably as part of the transnational/ international migration in the domestic and care economy – theorised under “global care chains” <fnref n="32" /> and the intersections of regimes <fnref n="33" />.

Among the items included under this code, we identified scholars analysing the changes that occurred in au pair programs in the past years. These refer to the fact that it has become “a form of domestic work with quite similar working and living conditions to that of live-in migrant domestic worker”<fnref n="34" />; “(mis-)used by employers for the performance of maidservants’ tasks” <fnref n="35" />; and “means of importing cheap labor primarily by dual career families”<fnref n="36" />. Despite this, Cox<fnref n="37" /> identifies that they experience similar problems to the ones that motivated the European Agreement in 1969 by the Council of Europe. This suggests that the phenomenon has not changed, but that it continues to develop in the grey area of ‘something other than work’<fnref n="38" />. These different approaches to the official design/purpose of these programs warrant further investigation of the law-making process for regulating au pairs in different legal orders.

The analysis of the results also led us to the conclusion that au pairing seems to be investigated by the scientific literature mainly at the intersection of migration and labour. In this sense, we also identified some discussions regarding the (un)

<footnote n="30">30 Erdal, Korzeniewska and Bertelli, 2023, p. 31-32.</footnote>

<footnote n="31">31 Dalgas, 2016b, p. 199.</footnote>

<footnote n="32">32 Hochschild, 2000.</footnote>

<footnote n="33">33 Lutz, 2008; Williams, 2012.</footnote>

<footnote n="34">34 Hess and Puckhaber, 2004, p. 65.</footnote>

<footnote n="35">35 Lutz, 2002, p. 70.</footnote>

<footnote n="36">36 Kofman, 2014, p. 88-89.</footnote>

<footnote n="37">37 Cox, 2015.</footnote>

<footnote n="38">38 Cox, 2015.</footnote>
skilled nature of the work performed. These were not related to the potential skills and experience that can be acquired through au pairing, but mainly to the way in which au pair programs enable "skilled workers occupying unskilled jobs abroad"<fnref n="39" />. In the same vein, some of the items explored the 'de-skilling' process that some au pairs experience, having qualifications that are not formally required for the role nor are reflected in their salaries (or pocket-money)<fnref n="40" />.

A further dimension related to the work performed by au pairs emerged from our coding. Some authors identify au pairing as a form of de facto temporary labour migration<fnref n="41" />. As an illustration, Vosko<fnref n="42" /> investigated the "back-door entry" to labour migration in Australia and Canada, revealing how programs forged under the cultural exchange discourse foster "precariousness among participants in programs imagined as fulfilling non-work purposes."

Our results emphasise how the phenomenon of au pairing is multifaceted, both in its empirical reality and its scientific representation, being explored through various perceptions on its use (by au pairs and by host family /employers). Finally, a cross-cutting theme emerging from our SLR is the role played by the state in regarding the scheme, in relation both to the legal framework and to the broader policies affecting the phenomenon<fnref n="43" />.

## 4. Final remarks

In this article we presented our first, tentative and perfectible, application of the SLR to conduct a literature review. The main inspiration for this methodology comes from medical research. It goes without saying that such a transplant requires important changes to the methods developed in other fields. In particular, we draw from systematic reviews, which are a type of study that aims to comprehensively identify and synthesise the available evidence on a particular research question or topic. It is characterised by a rigorous and structured approach to reviewing the literature and by a focus on a precise description of the criteria used to identify, select, and synthesise the relevant evidence<fnref n="44" />. The main objective of a systematic review is to provide a comprehensive summary of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic, which can then be used to inform decision-making, policy development, and

<footnote n="39">39 Williams and Baláž, 2005, p. 441.</footnote>

<footnote n="40">40 Moroșanu and Fox, 2013; Pietka, Clark and Canton, 2013; Gotehus, 2021.</footnote>

<footnote n="41">41 Andersen, 2017; Morokvasic, 2004; Vosko, 2023.</footnote>

<footnote n="42">42 Vosko, 2023, pp. 93-94.</footnote>

<footnote n="43">43 Anderson, 2009; Spanger, Dahl, and Peterson, 2017.</footnote>

<footnote n="44">44 Harris et al., 2013.</footnote>
future research<fnref n="45" />. In borrowing from other scientific disciplines, we are not driven
by the aim of anchoring the always contested nature of legal research to other, more
widely recognised as ‘scientific’ fields. Indeed, we do not claim that this methodology
makes legal research in any way more ‘scientific’.

Instead, a double goal drove us to design and then refine this technique. First, we wanted to reinforce the ‘systematic’ nature of legal research, which is sometimes described as one the elements characterising it<fnref n="46" /> but seems to be scarcely considered in the literature. In reflecting on this characteristic, we were confronted by the problem of how to prove that a given corpus of literature that we identified as relevant to explore a given subject was not simply cherry-picked to lead to a pre-determined conclusion.

Second, we aim to improve the transparency of our process, allowing for debate and critique of our choices, both in terms of the scope of the corpus, the rules adopted to determine relevance, and the coding of the items. At the end of this exercise, we were also convinced that this approach has the potential to help researchers identify their own biases in the selection of relevant literature, reducing reputational and network approaches to the construction of a literature review. Ultimately we believe that, while our specific protocol only represents one possible application, a systematic approach would improve literature reviews underpinning both doctrinal and inter-disciplinary legal research.

As for au pairs, our analysis highlights how the multifaceted nature of the phenomenon demands multiple scientific approaches, and methods, to investigate it. At the same time, our coding allowed us to identify common patterns across different disciplines, pointing to the fundamental interaction between migration and domestic and care work – even when such work is not legally defined as ‘employment’. In doing so, our literature review strongly points to the need of adopting a socio-legal perspective when investigating the legal regulation of au pairing. Furthermore, policy responses to the challenges highlighted by the literature should simultaneously take into account the role of au pairing as a response to care demands, and as a tool to enact migratory strategies, develop/improve skills, and knowledge of a given culture.

<footnote n="45">45 Ng and Peh, 2010.</footnote>

<footnote n="46">46 Nielsen, 2010.</footnote>
Bibliography

* Ahrens, J. & King, R. (Eds) *Onward Migration and Multi-Sited Transnationalism: Complex Trajectories, Practices and Ties*. Switzerland: Springer IMISCOE Research Series. pp. 22-43.

* Andersen, N. T. (2017) ‘A Philippine History of Denmark From Pioneer Settlers to Permanently Temporary Workers’. *Philippine Studies: Historical & Ethnographic Viewpoints*, 65(1), pp. 31-70.

* Anderson, B. (2009) *What's in a name? Immigration controls and subjectivities: The case of au pairs and domestic worker visa holders in the UK*. Subjectivity, 29, 407-424.

* Banakar, R. & Travers, M. (Eds.) (2005) *Theory and method in socio-legal research*. United Kingdom: Hart Publishing.

* Bardin, L. (2011) *Análise de conteúdo*. Brasil: Edições 70.

* Búriková, Z. S. (2016) ‘EU ENLARGEMENT AND AU PAIRING IN THE UNITED KINGDOM: The experiences and migratory strategies of Slovak au pairs’. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 6(4), pp. 207-214.

* Búriková, Z. S. (2019) ‘au pairs, nannies and babysitters: paid care as a temporary life course experience in Slovakia and in the UK’. *Feminist Review*, 122, pp. 80-94.

* Calavita, K. (2010) *Invitation to Law & Society: An Introduction to the Study of Real Law*. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

* Cane, P. & Kritzer, H. M. (2012). *The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Research*. Oxford University Press Inc.

* Christensen, K. (2020) ‘NORWEGIAN WOMEN’S EXPERIENCES OF 20TH-CENTURY MIGRATION TO ENGLAND’. *Nordic Journal of Migration Research*, 10(1), pp. 18-33.

* Cox, R. (2015) “Introduction” in Cox, R. (Ed.) *Au pairs’ lives in global context: sisters or servants? Palgrave Macmillan*. pp. 1-15.

* Dalgas, K. M. (2016a) ‘AU PAIRS ON FACEBOOK: Ethnographic use of social media in politicised fields’. *Nordic Journal of Migration Research*, 6(3), pp. 175-182.

* Dalgas, K. M. (2016b) ‘FILIPINO AU PAIRS ON THE MOVE: Navigating strong and weak ties in the search of future paths’. *Nordic Journal of Migration Research*, 6(4), pp. 199-206.

* Eldén, S. & Anving, T. (2016) ‘New Ways of Doing the ‘Good’ and Gender Equal Family: Parents Employing Nannies and Au Pairs in Sweden’. *Sociological Research Online*, 21(4), pp. 44-56.

* Eldén, S. & Anving, T. (2019a) ‘Nanny care in Sweden: The inequalities of everyday doings of care’. *Journal of European Social Policy*, 29(5), pp. 614-626.

* Eldén, S. & Anving, T. (2019b) ‘NANNY FAMILIES: Practices of Care by Nannies, Au Pairs, Parents and Children in Sweden’. *Bristol University Press*.
* Eldén, S. & Anving, T. (2022) "CHAPTER 5 ‘Quality Time’ in Nanny Families: Local Care Loops and New Inequalities in Sweden" in Näre, L. & Isaksen, L. W. (Eds.) Care Loops and Mobilities in Nordic, Central, and Eastern European Welfare States. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Family and Intimate Life. pp. 85-107.

* Epstein, L. & Martin, A. D. (2014) An Introduction to Empirical Legal Research. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

* Erdal, M. B., Korzeniewska, L. & Bertelli, D. (2023) "Chapter 2 Becoming Destination(s)? Complex Migration Trajectories, Transnational Lifeworlds and Migration Decisions" in

* Geserick, C. (2012). "I Always Wanted to Go Abroad. And I Like Children": Motivations of Young People to Become Au Pairs in the USA'. YOUNG, 20(1), pp. 49-67.

* Geserick, C. (2016) ""AMERICA IS THE DREAM OF SO MANY THINGS": Images and experiences of German speaking au pairs in the United States'. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 6(4), pp. 243-251.

* Gotehus, A. (2021) 'Agency in deskilling: Filipino nurses' experiences in the Norwegian health care sector'. Geoforum, 126, pp. 340-349.

* Grüning, B. & Camozzi, I. (2023) ‘Ticket to ride: national and international mobility as a multi-faceted resource in the life courses of young Italian graduates’. Higher Education, pp. 01-16.

* Harzig, C. (2006) 'Domestics of the World (Unite?): Labor Migration Systems and Personal Trajectories of Household Workers in Historical and Global Perspective'. Journal of American Ethnic History, 25(2/3), pp. 48-73.

* Hess, S. & Puckhaber, A. (2004) "Big Sisters' Are Better Domestic Servants?! Comments on the Booming Au Pair Business'. Feminist Review, 77, pp. 65-78.

* Hirata, H. (2002) 'Globalização e divisão sexual do trabalho'. Cadernos Pagu, 17(18), pp. 139-156.

* Hochschild, A. R. (2000) "Global Care Chains and Emotional Surplus Value" in Hutton, W. & Giddens, A. (Eds.) On the Edge: Living with Global Capitalism. London: Jonathan Cape. pp. 130-146.

* Isaksen, L. W. & Bikova, M. (2019) ‘Egalitarian ideologies on the move: Changing care practices and gender norms in Norway’. Journal of European Social Policy, 29(5), pp. 627-639.

* Jandl, M. et al. (2009) Migration and Irregular Work in Austria: A Case Study of the Structure and Dynamics of Irregular Foreign Employment in Europe at the Beginning of the 21st Century. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

* Kofman, E. (2014) 'Gendered migrations, social reproduction and the household in Europe'. Dialectical Anthropology, 38, pp. 79-94.

* Lutz, H. (2002) 'At Your Service Madam! The Globalization of Domestic Service'. Feminist Review, 70, pp. 89-104.
* Lutz, H. (Ed.) (2008) *Migration and Domestic Work: A European Perspective on a Global Theme*. Surrey: Ashgate.

* Mayes, R. & Koshy, P. (2018) ‘Transnational Labour Migration and the Place of Reproductive Labour’. Work, Employment & Society, 32(4), pp. 670-686.

* McConville, M. & Chui W. H. (Eds.) (2007) *Research Methods for Law*. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

* McDowell, L. (2003) ‘The Particularities of Place: Geographies of Gendered Moral Responsibilities among Latvian Migrant Workers in 1950s Britain’. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 28(1), pp. 19-34.

* Morokvasic, M. (2004) ‘Settled in Mobility’: Engendering Post-Wall Migration in Europe*. *Feminist Review*, 77, pp. 07-25.

* Moroşanu, L., & Fox, J. E. (2013) ‘No smoke without fire’: Strategies of coping with stigmatised migrant identities*. *Ethnicities*, 13(4), pp. 438-456.

* OECD et al. (2021) ‘2021 Annual International Migration and Forced Displacement Trends and Policies Report to the G20’. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd.org/els/mig/OECD-ILO-IOM-UNHCR-2021-migration-report-to-the-G20.pdf

* Petticrew, M. & Roberts, H. (2006) *Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide*. New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing.

* Pietka, E., Clark, C. & Canton, N. (2013) “I know that I have a university diploma and I’m working as a driver’ Explaining the EU post-enlargement movement of highly skilled Polish migrant workers to Glasgow” in Glorius, B., Grabowska-Lusinska, I. & Kuvik, A. *Mobility in Transition: Migration Patterns after EU Enlargement*. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. pp. 133-154.

* Rocca, M. (2023) *The new old ways: from interdisciplinarity to systematic reviews [Conference presentation]*. LLRN6 2023 Conference, Warsaw, Poland.

* Rohde-Abuba, C. (2016) “THE GOOD GIRL FROM RUSSIA CAN DO IT ALL’: Au pairs’ perspective on morality and immorality in the au pair relation’. *Nordic Journal of Migration Research*, 6(4), pp. 215-223.

* Salehijam, M. (2018) ‘The Value of Systematic Content Analysis in Legal Research’. *Tilburg Law Review*, 23(1), pp. 34–42.

* Spanger, M., Dahl, H. M., & Peterson, E. (2017). *Rethinking Global Care Chains Through The Perspective Of Heterogeneous States, Discursive Framings And Multi-Level Governance*. *Nordic Journal of Migration Research*, 7(4), 251-259.

* Tomlins, C. L. (2007) ‘How Autonomous Is Law’. *Annual Review of Law and Social Science*, 3, pp. 45-68.

* van Hoecke, M. (2011) ‘Legal Doctrine: Which Method(s) for What Kind of Discipline?’. In M. Van Hoecke (ed.), *Methodologies of legal Research Which Kind of Method for What Kind of discipline?*, Hart, pp. 1-19.
* Vosko, L. F. (2023) ‘Through the back-door: How Australia and Canada use working holiday programs to fulfill demands for migrant work via cultural exchange’. Journal of Industrial Relations, 65(1), pp. 88-111.

* Williams, A. M. & Baláž, V. (2005) ‘What Human Capital, Which Migrants? Returned Skilled Migration to Slovakia From the UK’. The International Migration Review, 39(2), pp. 439-468.

* Williams, F. (2012) ‘Converging variations in migrant care work in Europe’. Journal of European Social Policy, 22(4), pp. 363-376.

* Zimmerman, K. F. et al. (2007) “2 The Migration Issue in Germany” in Zimmerman, K. F. et al. Immigration Policy and the Labor Market: The German Experience and Lessons for Europe. Berlin: Springer Berlin. pp. 07-44.

* Zwysen, W. & Akgüç, M. (2023) ‘Analysing the flows and labour market outcomes of short-term mobile workers in the EU’. ETUI Working Paper 2023, 07, pp. 1-3