Researchers at the Oxford Internet Institute have published a systematic review of 83 studies examining digital technologies used in unpaid care, finding that while these tools offer concrete benefits, they also introduce what the authors describe as fundamental and systematic changes to the nature of care — changes that bring identifiable risks.
The paper, “The risks and opportunities of adopting digital technologies as part of unpaid care,” is authored by Dr Ekaterina Hertog, Lulu Shi, and Lily Rodel, and is published in the Oxford Review of Economic Policy, volume 41, issues 3–4, 2025. The studies reviewed covered unpaid care contexts in the United States, Europe, urban China, and South Korea.
Scope of the problem
In England, unpaid carers outnumber paid carers by two to one, according to the 2021 Census. The economic value of unpaid care in the UK is estimated at £184 billion a year, according to research by the Centre for Care accessed via Carers UK. The OII notes there has been no prior systematic evaluation of risks linked to digital care technologies for this population.
The technologies examined in the reviewed studies include baby monitors, location-monitoring devices for elderly people and adolescents, school and nursery coordination apps, telehealth tools, parenting information apps, elderly care robots, and online community forums.
Documented benefits
The researchers identify several categories of benefit. Digital care technologies can enable remote care, allowing carers to monitor or support people they are not physically present with. They improve coordination between multiple carers. And they provide access to online communities that offer information and social support, which the researchers note can reduce isolation among unpaid carers.
Documented risks
The review identifies five categories of risk, each described as systematic rather than incidental:
Data privacy. Digital care tools collect intimate personal information — about health conditions, behaviour, movement, and daily routines — often without explicit consent from the person being monitored. The researchers flag two distinct pathways: within-family sharing of that data can produce new tensions between family members; and collection by technology companies introduces risk if companies monetise that data.
Carer burnout. The always-on nature of connected monitoring can lead unpaid carers to feel overwhelmed. The researchers note that women, as the primary caregivers in most household contexts, face the greatest exposure to this risk.
Reducing care to numbers. The review finds that digital technologies can produce an overreliance on measurable outputs — statistics about activity, sleep, or movement — at the expense of the emotional and relational dimensions of care.
Replacing face-to-face contact. The researchers identify a threshold effect: if remote care tools displace rather than supplement physical presence, the closeness and touch that they describe as central to caregiving and to the wellbeing of people receiving care is lost.
Amplifying inequality. The digital divide — the gap between those with reliable internet access, current devices, and technical literacy, and those without — means that people who could benefit most from care technologies may be the least able to use them.
Regulatory gap
Dr Hertog, who led the research, is quoted in the OII announcement: “We urgently need better regulation that specifically addresses care technologies. These technologies are already in our homes, and we need to be sure their use is ethically managed. Tech companies are often opaque about how they gather and use data, with people having little control over the process. In some places like the US, the regulations that govern this area are weak. In Europe, they are incomplete, with specific provisions protecting children’s, but not vulnerable adults’ data. This isn’t an area that should be purely left to market forces, given how essential care is to society.”
Dr Hertog also acknowledged the positive potential of care technologies, noting that the critical factor is whether people retain the right to choose the kind of care they receive, and that care technology works best when it supports human relationships rather than substituting for physical connection.
The paper does not make specific legislative recommendations, and the OII’s announcement does not name any technology companies or products by name in relation to data practices.