Pe e s, Eileen; Pohlmeye , Me le; Buscho , Ka in Schulze
A icle — Published Ve sion
Di e ging Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic
on Subjec i e Well-Being o he Solo Sel -Employed and
Employees in Ge many (2019–2023)
Social Indica o s Resea ch
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Sp inge Na u e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Pe e s, Eileen; Pohlmeye , Me le; Buscho , Ka in Schulze (2025) : Di e ging
Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic on Subjec i e Well-Being o he Solo Sel -Employed
and Employees in Ge many (2019–2023), Social Indica o s Resea ch, ISSN 1573-0921, Sp inge
Ne he lands, Do d ech , Vol. 180, Iss. 1, pp. 183-204,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11205-025-03640-8
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/330896
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Accep ed: 28 May 2025 / Published online: 17 June 2025
© The Au ho (s) 2025, co ec ed publica ion 2025
Eileen Pe e s
eileen.pe e s@boeckle .de
1 Ins i u e o Economic and Social Resea ch, Düsseldo , Ge many
Di e ging Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic
on Subjec i e Well-Being o he Solo Sel -Employed and
Employees in Ge many (2019–2023)
EileenPe e s1· Me lePohlmeye 1· Ka in SchulzeBuscho 1
Social Indica o s Resea ch (2025) 180:183–204
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11205-025-03640-8
Abs ac
P e ious esea ch indica es ha he sel -employed ha e highe subjec i e well-being
(SWB) han employees. Howe e , du ing he COVID-19 pandemic, many sel -employed
indi iduals expe ienced excep ionally high le els o economic s ess due o limi ed go -
e nmen and social secu i y suppo . This is especially ue o he solo sel -employed
(i.e., sel -employed wi hou employees). D awing on na ionally ep esen a i e panel da a
spanning he yea s 2019–2023—and hus he onse , peak, and ading ou o he pandem-
ic—we used ixed-e ec s eg ession models o analyze he SWB ajec o ies o he solo
sel -employed and employees in Ge many in e ms o li e sa is ac ion and job sa is ac ion.
Ou esul s show ha SWB was only mode a ely a ec ed in 2020 bu declined s eeply in
2021. Al hough li e sa is ac ion eco e ed mode a ely in 2022 and 2023, i emained sub-
s an ially lowe han p e-pandemic le els. The li e sa is ac ion o he solo sel -employed
dec eased mo e s ongly han ha o employees in 2020 and 2021. Job sa is ac ion also
saw a s eep decline in 2021, wi h solo sel -employed indi iduals expe iencing a g ea e
d op han employees. Howe e , he job sa is ac ion o he solo sel -employed e u ned
o p e-pandemic le els in 2022, whe eas ha o employees con inued o decline in 2022
and 2023. These insigh s shed ligh on how he SWB o di e en employmen g oups
was a ec ed du ing his unp eceden ed c isis and p o ide aluable in o ma ion o mo e
e ec i e in e en ions in u u e c ises.
Keywo ds Subjec i e well-being · COVID-19 · Solo sel -employed · Employees ·
Ge many
1 3
E. Pe e s e al.
1 In oduc ion
The li es o people ac oss he globe we e ab up ly and undamen ally changed by he ou -
b eak o he COVID-19 pandemic. Measu es o con ain he sp ead o he i us had signi i-
can epe cussions on bo h he public and p i a e sphe es. Social dis ancing manda es and
lockdowns in pa icula con ibu ed o a ma ked inc ease in anxie y, dep ession, s ess, and
eelings o social isola ion and loneliness (Benke e al., 2022; B odeu e al., 2021). Fu -
he mo e, wo k condi ions we e hea ily impac ed. Some sec o s expe ienced a slowdown,
o he s saw a su ge in demand, esul ing in he e ogeneous e ec s on people’s wo k hou s—
u loughs and sho - ime wo k o some, o e ime o o he s (Alon e al., 2020; Bünning
e al., 2020; F ode mann e al., 2020). These pandemic- ela ed measu es al e ed li ing and
wo k condi ions and had ad e se e ec s on men al heal h and subjec i e well-being (SWB)
(e.g., Bäh e al., 2022; Huebene e al., 2024; K iechel e al., 2024; Nieuwenhuis & Ye kes,
2021; Pa zina e al., 2024; Pe e s e al., 2023; Zoch e al., 2021), which in ensi ied as he
pandemic p og essed—also wi h he ad en o o he c ises (Benke e al., 2022; En inge &
K öge , 2021; K iechel e al., 2024; Pa zina e al., 2024).
Howe e , ad e si y and ad an age in coping wi h he bu dens esul ing om he pan-
demic pe se and wi h he es ic ions o help con ain i (e.g., lockdowns, social dis ancing)
we e unequally dis ibu ed ac oss social g oups (Adams-P assl e al., 2020; Pe e s e al.,
2023). I quickly became clea ha in mos coun ies he sel -employed we e pa icula ly
ha d hi by he (nega i e) consequences o he pandemic and he es ic ions associa ed
wi h i (Adams-P assl e al., 2020; G aebe e al., 2021; To ès e al., 2022; Yue & Cowl-
ing, 2021). Resea ch on he si ua ion in Ge many indica es ha he sel -employed we e
signi ican ly mo e impac ed han employees by pandemic- ela ed sales and income losses
(K i ikos e al., 2020; Pe e s & Schulze Buscho , 2025). Income losses among he sel -
employed we e no only mo e se e e bu also pe sis ed longe ; as o Janua y 2022, wice
as many sel -employed indi iduals epo ed income losses due o he pandemic compa ed
wi h employees (Pe e s & Schulze Buscho , 2025). Fu he mo e, income losses we e mo e
p onounced among he sel -employed han among employees (G aebe e al., 2021; K i-
ikos e al., 2020; Pe e s & Schulze Buscho , 2025). The solo sel -employed— ha is, sel -
employed pe sons wi hou employees—we e pa icula ly a ec ed by he nega i e impac o
he pandemic on income and by eelings o inancial s ain (Schulze Buscho & Emmle ,
2021).
As i became e iden ha he sel -employed we e pa icula ly ulne able o inancial
di icul ies and eme gencies, he Ge man go e nmen in oduced a ious inancial suppo
p og ams. One o he ea lies and mos p ominen was he Immedia e Assis ance P og am
(So o hil e-P og amm), which p o ided a one- ime paymen o up o €15,000 o sel -
employed indi iduals a ec ed by e enue declines. Howe e , his inancial aid could no
ully compensa e o income losses o co e li ing expenses, al hough his would ha e
been necessa y, especially o many solo sel -employed indi iduals (G abka, 2021). Thus,
in con as o he sho - ime wo king allowance a ailable o employees, hese measu es
did no o e su icien p o ec ion agains inancial ha dship (Da id e al., 2022; G abka,
2021; S iel e al., 2021; Webe e al., 2024).1 Consequen ly, many sel -employed indi iduals
1 The sho - ime wo king allowance (Ku za bei e geld) scheme was one o he mos ele an measu es in
Ge many in e ms o p o ec ing employees om income losses and u loughs. The Fede al Employmen
Agency subsidizes up o 60% o employees’ ne income (o 67% o employees wi h child en).
1 3
184
Di e ging Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic on Subjec i e…
aced se e e h ea s o hei li elihoods, as con ac es ic ions, shu downs, and es ic ed
s o e opening hou s limi ed hei business, o cing many o gi e up hei sel -employmen
(Hanschke & S auß, 2021; K i ikos e al., 2021). The pandemic hus unde sco ed he ul-
ne abili y o he sel -employed du ing c ises, p ima ily due o hei inadequa e social secu-
i y p o ec ion. The implica ions a e p o ound: Resea ch indica es ha he men al heal h
and li e sa is ac ion o sel -employed indi iduals de e io a ed mo e han ha o employees
(K i ikos e al., 2020; To ès e al., 2022; Yue & Cowling, 2021).
Al hough hese s udies explo ed how he pandemic a ec ed he SWB o bo h he sel -
employed and employees, mos co e ed only he ini ial phase. Fi s esea ch o Ge many
shows ha being sel -employed was associa ed wi h g ea e dec eases in SWB compa ed
wi h employees, indica ing ha he sel -employed a e a ulne able g oup (K i ikos e al.,
2020; Jaschke e al., 2023; Zoch e al. 2022). While hese indings o e some insigh s, he e
is s ill a c i ical need o in es iga e how he medium- e m consequences o he pandemic
shaped he SWB ajec o ies o bo h sel -employed indi iduals and employees. Key ques-
ions emain unanswe ed: Did SWB con inue o de e io a e as he pandemic p og essed,
o did i eco e wi h he ollou o accines and he easing o es ic ions? Did he SWB
ajec o ies o he solo sel -employed and employees di e ge as he pandemic un olded and
e en ually eceded?
This pape ex ends p e ious esea ch by examining SWB ajec o ies no only du ing he
ini ial phase o he pandemic bu also as i p og essed and eceded, and by assessing whe he
SWB among employees and he solo sel -employed eco e ed, o i linge ing e ec s pe -
sis ed—an aspec ha p e ious esea ch has no add essed. Using longi udinal da a om he
na ionally ep esen a i e Ge man Panel S udy Labou Ma ke and Social Secu i y (PASS;
T appmann e al., 2019) co e ing he yea s 2019–2023, we explo ed how di e en employ-
men g oups coped wi h ex eme s esso s o e ime, hus cap u ing he medium- e m con-
sequences o he pandemic. This pe iod was cha ac e ized by mul iple c ises, including
Russia’s wa agains Uk aine, ising ene gy p ices, and inc easing in la ion a es, all o
which nega i ely impac ed SWB (K iechel e al., 2024). Al hough a ew s udies o da e ha e
explo ed how SWB (Huebene e al., 2024; K iechel e al., 2024) and men al heal h (Pa zina
e al., 2024) de eloped du ing and a e he pandemic in Ge many, hey did no ocus on
di e ences be ween he sel -employed and employees.
Fu he mo e, p e ious s udies ha e mos ly no accoun ed o he ac ha he sel -
employed a e a e y he e ogeneous g oup, anging om he solo sel -employed o hose
wi h nume ous employees (Binde , 2017; Johansson Se ä e al., 2015). Hence, his pape
ocuses on he solo sel -employed, who end o ha e mo e p eca ious wo king condi ions
compa ed wi h hei coun e pa s wi h employees (Binde , 2017; Binde & Coad, 2012), and
who appea o ha e been pa icula ly a ec ed economically by he es ic ions o con ain
he i us (Schulze Buscho & Emmle , 2021). In doing so, we ollow calls om esea che s
emphasizing he impo ance o ecognizing he he e ogenei y wi hin he sel -employed pop-
ula ion o a oid blu ing he ela ionship be ween sel -employmen and SWB (e.g., Binde ,
2017). Finally, by examining di e en dimensions o SWB, his pape explo es whe he
he pandemic had a ying e ec s on SWB. I ope a ionalizes SWB h ough measu es o
o e all li e sa is ac ion and job sa is ac ion. By dis inguishing be ween hese wo aspec s, i
p o ides a mo e nuanced unde s anding o how di e en componen s o SWB we e a ec ed
du ing he pandemic.
1 3
185
E. Pe e s e al.
2 Sel -Employmen in Ge many and he COVID-19 Pandemic
Sel -employmen in Ge many is in a cons an s a e o lux and is cha ac e ized by a high le el
o dynamism. This is ue bo h o he numbe o sel -employed indi iduals and he s uc u e
and composi ion o sel -employmen . Recen decades ha e seen a pa icula inc ease in he
sha e o he solo sel -employed. In 2002, he g oup o he sel -employed included o he
i s ime mo e solo sel -employed pe sons han sel -employed indi iduals wi h employees.
This end ended in 2012, and since hen, he o e all numbe o sel -employed indi iduals
has declined, wi h he numbe o solo sel -employed indi iduals dec easing e en mo e han
ha o sel -employed indi iduals wi h employees. In 2023, a ound 8.5% o he Ge man
wo k o ce we e sel -employed, which co esponds o a ound 3.9 million people (Fede al
S a is ical O ice, 2024).
In ecen yea s, sel -employmen has eme ged as a highly he e ogeneous employmen
ca ego y encompassing a ious indus ies and p o essional ields. As his he e ogenei y
inc eases, he bounda ies be ween dependen employmen and sel -employmen a e becom-
ing inc easingly blu ed. Fu he mo e, in Ge many, social secu i y law has signi ican gaps
in he p o ec ion o he sel -employed, and labo law p o ides only agmen a y p o ec ion
o sel -employed indi iduals. Fo ins ance, s a u o y minimum wage egula ions do no
apply o he sel -employed, lea ing hem wi hou a lowe limi o income p o ec ion. This
p oblem is pa icula ly p e alen in he pla o m economy, whe e o de s o uni s o wo k a e
awa ded online, la gely independen o ime and place, o wo ke s who a e o mally classi-
ied as sel -employed (Schulze Buscho , 2018). Sel -employmen in Ge many is inc eas-
ingly di e se and pola ized, wi h signi ican dispa i ies in social ci cums ances and income
le els compa ed wi h employees (Bonin e al., 2022). O e all, he de elopmen in ecen
yea s owa ds a di e si ica ion o sel -employmen has been accompanied by a compa a-
i ely high p opo ion o solo sel -employed indi iduals wi h p eca ious wo king condi ions
cha ac e ized by i egula and low income and insu icien access o social secu i y p o ec-
ions (B enke & Beznoska, 2016; Conen e al., 2016; Ve meylen e al., 2017).
The lack o comp ehensi e social secu i y co e age o he sel -employed is p edomi-
nan ly a Ge man phenomenon. Whe eas mos EU coun ies include sel -employed indi idu-
als in s a e insu ance schemes, Ge many manda es compulso y insu ance only o a ew
speci ic g oups, o o hose classi ied as bogus sel -employed (Webe e al., 2024).2 This
limi a ion is based on he assump ion ha he sel -employed can independen ly p o ide o
hei own wel a e and do no equi e collec i e p o ec ion h ough public insu ance sys ems
(Schulze Buscho , 2016). Howe e , i is e iden ha many sel -employed people—pa -
icula ly he solo sel -employed—a e no di e en om hose al eady subjec o compulso y
insu ance o om employees, in ha hey ely on selling hei labo and ace he same social
isks, such as old age, illness, and unemploymen . Thus, he e ha e been long-s anding
calls o he comp ehensi e inclusion o all sel -employed wo ke s in s a e social secu i y
sys ems (Fachinge , 2007; Schulze Buscho , 2016).
2 Some social insu ance b anches ha e been opened o sel -employed indi iduals. Since 2006, sel -employed
pe sons ha e been eligible o olun a y con inued pa icipa ion in unemploymen insu ance, bu only a e a
pe iod o dependen employmen . Heal h insu ance became manda o y o all in 2009. Howe e , social secu-
i y ules emain agmen ed, wi h abou a qua e o sel -employed pe sons en olled in special manda o y
pension schemes; his sha e a ies widely by occupa ional g oup.
1 3
186
Di e ging Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic on Subjec i e…
The pandemic highligh ed he ulne able si ua ion o he sel -employed in e ms o
social p o ec ion agains labo ma ke isks, as i quickly became clea ha his g oup was
pa icula ly ha d hi by i s (nega i e) consequences (K i ikos e al., 2020, 2021; Seebaue e
al., 2021; Schulze Buscho & Emmle , 2021). Hence, a he end o 2020, he go e nmen
ook s eps o p o ec he sel -employed by adop ing he Social P o ec ion Package I, which
p o ided easie access o basic social secu i y o he sel -employed, among o he s. Finan-
cial suppo p og ams, such as he Immedia e Assis ance P og am (So o hil e-P og amm),
p o ided one- ime paymen s o up o €15,000 o hose sel -employed pe sons a ec ed by
e enue declines. Howe e , he inancial aid could no ully compensa e o income losses
o co e li ing expenses (G abka, 2021). Unlike employees, he sel -employed we e no
eligible o he sho - ime wo k allowance and emained poo ly p o ec ed agains isks
such as unemploymen and income loss. Many s uggled o sus ain hei businesses du -
ing con ac es ic ions and qua an ines, leading some o abandon sel -employmen al o-
ge he (Hanschke & S auß, 2021; K i ikos e al., 2021). As a esul , he sel -employed aced
g ea e inancial wo ies and income losses han employees du ing he pandemic (K i ikos
e al., 2020; Pe e s & Schulze Buscho , 2025). In summa y, he sel -employed—especially
solo sel -employed indi iduals—we e mo e a ec ed han employees by he nega i e conse-
quences o he pandemic, pa icula ly in he o m o inancial losses (e.g., Schulze Buscho
& Emmle , 2021). This aises he ques ion o whe he hese inancial losses and g ea e
unce ain ies also impac ed hei SWB.
3 Shi s in SWB Among Employees and he Sel -Employed
The concep o SWB o igina ed in posi i e psychology (Diene , 1984) and is associa ed
wi h good heal h, longe i y, be e social ela ionships, wo k pe o mance, and c ea i i y
(Diene e al., 2018).3 I has been inc easingly adop ed in ields such as sociology and eco-
nomics as an indica o o quali y o li e (Diene & Chan, 2011; S igli z e al., 2009). SWB
can be in luenced by di e en a eas o li e, such as amily si ua ion, social en i onmen ,
heal h, and wo k. In he absence o majo li e e en s and ex e nal shocks, SWB—and pa ic-
ula ly i s cogni i e componen , li e sa is ac ion—is gene ally ega ded as a ela i ely s able
cons uc , exhibi ing minimal luc ua ions o e ime. Low le els o SWB may no only
ad e sely impac indi idual heal h bu can also lead o nega i e labo ma ke ou comes,
unde sco ing he impo ance o moni o ing SWB as a i al elemen o social policy e alu-
a ion and de elopmen (McMahan & Es es, 2011). Hence, dec eases in SWB may indica e
ha poli ical ac o s should ake social policy measu es.
The pandemic—and go e nmen measu es o con ain i — esul ed in es ic ions on peo-
ple’s pe sonal and p o essional li es. Along wi h inancial losses and wo ies, he e was
an inc ease in subjec i e s esses such as loneliness, wo y, and dep ession (B odeu e al.
2021; K i ikos e al., 2020; Pe e s & Schulze Buscho , 2025). Ini ial e idence o Ge -
many indica es ha SWB dec eased du ing he i s yea a e he ou b eak o he pandemic
3 Diene ’s de ini ion o SWB comp ises an a ec i e and a cogni i e componen . The a ec i e componen
e e s o moods and emo ions, which ep esen people’s immedia e e alua ions o li e e en s (Diene e al.,
1999). When examining he cou se o SWB du ing he pandemic, we conside ed he cogni i e componen ,
li e sa is ac ion, because a comp ehensi e assessmen o he li e si ua ion was mo e meaning ul o he p es-
en esea ch han an assessmen o he a ec i e componen .
1 3
187
E. Pe e s e al.
(Bäh e al., 2022; Nieuwenhuis & Ye kes, 2021; Zoch e al., 2021). The e o e, based on
he signi ican ly al e ed li e and wo k ci cums ances due o go e nmen es ic ions du ing
he pandemic in Ge many and on p e ious esea ch, we p opose he ollowing hypo hesis:
H1. The SWB o solo sel -employed indi iduals and employees in Ge many declined du -
ing he pandemic.
C oss-na ional compa a i e s udies show ha he sel -employed gene ally ha e highe SWB
han employees (e.g., Johansson Se ä e al., 2015; No denma k e al., 2023; Yue & Cowl-
ing, 2021). This is usually a ibu ed o he en ep eneu ial oppo uni ies, g ea e au onomy,
and lexibili y o sel -employmen (Binde , 2017; Binde & Coad, 2012). Howe e , sel -
employmen also b ings inhe en isks, such as income ins abili y and job insecu i y (Binde ,
2017; Binde & Coad, 2012). No wi hs anding hese isks, s udies p o ide e idence o
g ea e SWB among he sel -employed compa ed wi h employees (e.g., Johansson Se ä e
al., 2015; No denma k e al., 2023; Yue & Cowling, 2021). Du ing he pandemic, many o
he ypical ad an ages o sel -employmen , such as lexibili y and au onomy, we e se e ely
cons ained by lockdowns and go e nmen es ic ions, while he nega i e aspec s—pa -
icula ly inancial ins abili y—became mo e p onounced. Besides he ad e se e ec s on
income, he e we e also clea nega i e e ec s on he SWB o he sel -employed. Compa ed
wi h employees, he sel -employed—and he solo sel -employed in pa icula —we e mo e
equen ly impac ed by subjec i e ac o s such as he hea y bu den o hei wo k si ua ion,
inancial p essu es, and conce ns ega ding hei p o essional u u e (Schulze Buscho &
Emmle , 2021). Fu he mo e, esea ch indings indica e ha he men al heal h o he sel -
employed de e io a ed mo e han ha o employees, and ha hei li e sa is ac ion declined
mo e sha ply (Caliendo e al., 2022; K i ikos e al., 2020; To ès e al., 2022; Jaschke e al.,
2023). This means ha , in addi ion o he g ea e inancial ha dships du ing he pandemic,
he e we e di e ences in subjec i e pe cep ions, such as s ess and wo ies, which we e
mo e p onounced among he sel -employed, especially he solo sel -employed (K i ikos e
al., 2020; Schulze Buscho & Emmle , 2021).
A compa ison o he SWB o he sel -employed and employees in he EU-27 coun ies
du ing he pandemic (No denma k e al., 2023) sugges s ha he di e en wel a e sys ems—
and hus he di e en le els o social secu i y p o ec ion o he sel -employed—could be
esponsible o di e ences in SWB be ween hese wo g oups. In he No dic coun ies (e.g.,
Denma k, Finland, Sweden), whose wel a e sys ems di e om hose o coun ies such
as Ge many, smalle di e ences in SWB we e obse ed be ween he sel -employed and
employees. In Ge many, he sel -employed appea o ha e been signi ican ly mo e a ec ed
by he c isis han employees, which also ansla ed in o g ea e dec eases in hei SWB du -
ing he i s mon hs o he pandemic (K i ikos e al., 2020; Zoch e al. 2021). Conside ing
he di e en dynamics and p o ec ion measu es du ing he pandemic in Ge many and hei
he e ogeneous impac on he bu dens expe ienced by he solo sel -employed and employ-
ees, we hypo hesize:
H2. The decline in SWB du ing he pandemic in Ge many was mo e se e e among he solo
sel -employed han among employees.
1 3
188
Di e ging Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic on Subjec i e…
P e ious esea ch on SWB du ing he pandemic has ocused p edominan ly on he i s
yea a e he ou b eak. By con as , he p esen s udy also inco po a es da a om 2022, a
pe iod when many es ic ions aimed a cu bing he sp ead o he i us had been li ed and a
g adual e u n o no malcy was unde way, and 2023, when he majo i y o pandemic- ela ed
es ic ions had been li ed o nea ly a yea , which migh ha e helped o le el ou any nega-
i e impac s on SWB. Howe e , he pandemic may ha e had las ing e ec s on SWB due
o p olonged economic insecu i y, linge ing heal h issues, weakened social ies, and deep-
sea ed psychological sca s ha con inued o a ec i long a e es ic ions ha e been li ed.
Fu he mo e, his pe iod was ma ked by mul iple c ises, including Russia’s wa agains
Uk aine and ising ene gy p ices and in la ion a es. This aises he ques ion o whe he
SWB showed signs o eco e y in 2022 and 2023, o whe he he linge ing e ec s o he
pandemic and he mul iple o he c ises con inued o ha e a de imen al e ec .
4 Da a and Me hod
4.1 Da a and Sample
Ou analyses a e based on da a om he Ge man Panel S udy Labou Ma ke and Social
Secu i y (PASS) conduc ed by he Ins i u e o Employmen Resea ch (IAB) (T appmann e
al., 2019). PASS is an annual la ge-scale na ionally ep esen a i e panel su ey ha collec s
household- and indi idual-le el da a. The a ge popula ion comp ises all p i a e house-
holds in Ge many. In addi ion o a ep esen a i e gene al popula ion sample, PASS includes
a sample o wel a e bene i ecipien s. As we we e in e es ed in SWB, including sa is ac-
ion wi h employmen , we es ic ed he sample o employed and sel -employed espon-
den s. PASS da a a e collec ed using a mix o compu e -assis ed elephone in e iewing
(CATI) and compu e -assis ed pe sonal in e iewing (CAPI). The la ge sample size allows
o de ailed analyses o he employmen his o ies o sel -employed wo ke s and employees.
The panel da a include in o ma ion on esponden s’ sociodemog aphic and employmen
cha ac e is ics and hei sa is ac ion wi h ce ain li e domains. The longi udinal na u e o he
da a enables he depic ion o changes o e ime—also du ing he pandemic.
To cap u e how SWB ajec o ies e ol ed du ing he pandemic compa ed wi h p e-pan-
demic le els, we d ew on da a om Wa es 13–17 (2019–2023). To in e p e he esul s on
he de elopmen o SWB du ing his pe iod, i is essen ial o know wha pandemic- ela ed
measu es we e in place a he ime o he espec i e su eys and o conside how hey may
ela e o ou indings. Table A1 in he Online Appendix displays he pe cen age o in e -
iews conduc ed in each mon h o each su ey yea . PASS in e iews a e usually conduc ed
be ween Feb ua y and Ap il each yea . The sha e o in e iews conduc ed du ing hose
mon hs anged be ween 44% in 2023 and 84% in 2021. The e o e, a iances due o di e -
en in e iew ime poin s should no in luence ou esul s. In 2020 (Wa e 14), nea ly hal
o he esponden s ook pa in he su ey be ween Feb ua y and Ap il. In Ma ch 2020, as
COVID-19 in ec ion a es inc eased in Ge many, go e nmen measu es we e implemen ed
o cu b he sp ead o he i us. On Ma ch 22, lockdown measu es and con ac es ic ions
we e announced, which led o he closing o businesses and schools. The se ices sec o ,
in which a signi ican numbe o solo sel -employed indi iduals wo k, was pa icula ly
impac ed. Res ic ions we e g adually eased in May 2020. Thus, some esponden s we e
1 3
189
E. Pe e s e al.
in e iewed be o e and o he s a e he i s lockdown came in o o ce. Howe e , as he
pandemic was al eady salien in he news and al eady impac ed indi iduals’ beha io , he e
should be no di e ence be ween he SWB o esponden s in e iewed in Feb ua y and hose
in e iewed in Ma ch o Ap il.4
In 2021, 84% o he in e iews we e conduc ed be ween Feb ua y and Ap il—56% in
Ma ch alone. In No embe 2020, a pa ial lockdown was implemen ed, which had e ol ed
in o a s ic e lockdown by mid-Decembe 2020. These measu es we e epea edly ex ended.
A he beginning o Ma ch 2021, shops and close-con ac se ices we e pe mi ed o eopen,
subjec o s ic hygiene p o ocols. Howe e , on Ma ch 22, due o high in ec ion a es, he
lockdown was ex ended un il Ap il 18, 2021. This ma ked he inal lockdown, al hough he
o e all pandemic si ua ion emained unce ain. In 2022, he majo i y o PASS esponden s
we e in e iewed be ween Feb ua y and Ap il; again, o e hal o he in e iews (54%)
we e conduc ed in Ma ch. A he beginning o 2022, he numbe o in ec ions was high.
Howe e , due o widesp ead accina ion and inc eased es ing, no new lockdown measu es
we e implemen ed. In No embe 2021, he measu es we e educed o p oo o 2G s a us
( accina ed o eco e ed), 2G + s a us ( accina ed o eco e ed + nega i e COVID-19 es ),
o 3G s a us ( accina ed, eco e ed, o es ed), oge he wi h he obliga ion o wea a ace
mask. By Ap il 2022, he only emaining equi emen was o wea an FFP2 mask on public
anspo and in heal hca e acili ies and e i emen homes. Hence, his was a ading-ou
pe iod, whe e mos o he majo es ic ions had been li ed. The PASS su ey conduc ed in
2023 (Wa e 17)— he mos ecen su ey in ou da ase — hus se es as a i s obse a ion
a e mos pandemic measu es had been li ed o nea ly a yea .
We limi ed ou analyses o employees and sel -employed indi iduals aged 18–65 yea s.
To ensu e compa abili y o wo k hou s and mon hly wages, we excluded indi iduals in ma -
ginal employmen (Minijobbe ), and hose wi h “minijobs” in addi ion o hei main employ-
men , he eby educing he sample by 6.7%. In addi ion, as he g oup o sel -employed is
highly he e ogenous and ou ocus was on he solo sel -employed, we excluded all sel -
employed esponden s wi h employees (3%). Fu he mo e, we excluded con ibu ing am-
ily wo ke s and a me s, due o he di icul y o compa ing hese g oups o sel -employed
pe sons (e.g., Binde , 2017). The solo sel -employed in ou sample could be membe s o
he libe al p o essions o o he solo sel -employed pe sons.5 As SWB can be d i en by
employmen changes, we also excluded indi iduals who had changed hei employmen
s a us du ing he obse a ion pe iod (12.3%). Ou aim in so doing was o ensu e ha di e -
ences in SWB be ween he solo sel -employed and employees we e no due, o example,
o swi ches ou o sel -employmen in o dependen employmen o unemploymen (Binde ,
2017; Binde & Coad, 2012).6 A e lis wise dele ion o missing alues (4.7%), he inal
sample comp ised 7,152 indi iduals and encompassed 17,060 pe son-yea s, wi h 506 solo
4 A compa ison o he SWB o esponden s who pa icipa ed in Feb ua y wi h ha o esponden s who pa ici-
pa ed in Ma ch showed ha i did no di e s a is ically signi ican ly be ween hese g oups.
5 Addi ional sensi i i y analyses showed ha solo sel -employed membe s o he libe al p o essions and o he
solo sel -employed indi iduals did no di e in hei SWB de elopmen du ing he obse a ion pe iod. See
Table A3 and Fig. A2 and A3 in he Online Appendix.
6 The ansi ion ma ix shows ha he p e alence o swi ches was compa able a each ime poin , and ha
only a small pe cen age o esponden s (8.5% o solo sel -employed and 3.8% o employees) expe ienced
a change in employmen s a us du ing he obse a ion pe iod. Sensi i i y checks con i med ha esul s
emained subs an i ely unchanged when hese indi iduals we e included (see Online Appendix Table A4).
1 3
190
Di e ging Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic on Subjec i e…
om Model 1 in Table 2. These plo s show whe he he decline be ween 2019 and sub-
sequen obse a ion poin s di e ed s a is ically signi ican ly be ween solo sel -employed
esponden s and employees, hus indica ing which g oup was mo e a ec ed. I he con i-
dence in e als c oss ze o (dashed line), he di e ences we e no s a is ically signi ican a
he 90% con idence le el.
Figu e 3 shows ha om 2019 o 2020, he li e sa is ac ion o he solo sel -employed
dec eased o a g ea e ex en (b = − 0.212, p = 0.056) han ha o employees. This end pe -
sis ed in 2021, when he solo sel -employed expe ienced mo e nega i e impac s on hei li e
sa is ac ion compa ed wi h 2019 (b = − 0.239, p = 0.094) han did employees. As indica ed
by he s a is ically insigni ican in e ac ion e m in Model 1 in Table 2, he e we e no di e -
ences be ween he li e sa is ac ion ajec o ies o he wo g oups in 2022 o 2023.
Figu e 4 illus a es he condi ional ma ginal e ec s plo s de i ed om Model 2 in Table 2.
As he con idence in e als c ossed ze o (dashed line), he e was no di e ence in he impac
o he pandemic on job sa is ac ion among he solo sel -employed in 2020 compa ed wi h
employees. In 2021, he decline in job sa is ac ion was conside ably s eepe o he solo
sel -employed (b = 0.358, p = 0.066). Howe e , a e 2021, he e we e no s a is ically signi i-
can di e ences in job sa is ac ion ajec o ies be ween he wo g oups.
O e all, ou indings suppo H2, which posi ed ha he decline in SWB du ing he pan-
demic in Ge many was mo e se e e among he solo sel -employed han among employees.
Howe e , he s eepe decline in SWB among he solo sel -employed in 2021 was no a las -
ing end bu disappea ed in 2022, when pandemic- ela ed es ic ions we e g adually eased,
and in 2023, when hey had had been li ed o nea ly a yea .
Fig. 3 Di e ences in changes in li e sa is ac ion be ween he solo sel -employed and employees, 2019–
2023. No e: Based on Model 1 in Table 2. Own calcula ions based on da a om PASS Wa es 13–17. 90%
con idence in e als (CIs). Con olled o : ela ionship s a us, child en unde 15 yea s li ing in household,
weekly wo k hou s, log mon hly indi idual g oss income, eceip o pandemic- ela ed go e nmen aid,
eceip o social wel a e bene i s
1 3
197
E. Pe e s e al.
5.3 Sensi i i y Analyses
We pe o med se e al sensi i i y checks o ensu e he alidi y o ou co e indings (de ailed
esul s a ailable upon eques ). Fi s , we e-es ima ed ou models by eplacing indi idual
g oss mon hly income wi h household ne income o accoun o b oade inancial esou ces
a ailable o esponden s. While household income be e cap u es he ma e ial li ing condi-
ions wi hin a household—including pa ne income and public ans e s—i is less di ec ly
linked o he esponden ’s employmen s a us. In his al e na i e speci ica ion, he in e ac-
ion e ec s be ween su ey yea and solo sel -employmen on li e sa is ac ion (Table 2,
Model 1) became s a is ically insigni ican when household income was included ins ead o
indi idual income. This sugges s ha indi idual income plays a key s a is ical ole in di e -
en ia ing he li e sa is ac ion ajec o ies o solo sel -employed indi iduals and employees,
and ha excluding i may obscu e ele an a ia ion ela ed o income dispa i ies. In con-
as , esul s o job sa is ac ion (Table 2, Model 2) emained obus ega dless o whe he
indi idual o household income was con olled o . O e all, hese indings unde sco e he
impo ance o how income is ope a ionalized in models o subjec i e well-being: indi idual
income helps cla i y employmen - ela ed di e ences in li e sa is ac ion, whe eas house-
hold income may e lec compensa o y esou ces ha bu e inancial s ain and a enua e
obse ed g oup di e ences.
Especially du ing he pandemic, when ex e nal childca e was limi ed, indi iduals who
shoulde ed childca e esponsibili ies migh ha e expe ienced g ea e dec eases in SWB.
As he solo sel -employed usually ha e g ea e wo k lexibili y and au onomy, i migh
ha e been easie o hem o econcile inc eased childca e demands wi h wo k esponsibili-
ies. Howe e , accoun ing o childca e esponsibili ies did no change ou co e indings on
Fig. 4 Di e ences in changes in job sa is ac ion be ween he solo sel -employed and employees, 2019–
2023. No e: Based on Model 2 in Table 2. Own calcula ions based on da a om PASS Wa es 13–17. 90%
con idence in e als (CIs). Con olled o : ela ionship s a us, child en unde 15 yea s li ing in household,
weekly wo k hou s, log mon hly indi idual g oss income, eceip o pandemic- ela ed go e nmen aid,
eceip o social wel a e bene i s
1 3
198
Di e ging Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic on Subjec i e…
SWB. Fu he mo e, con olling o educa ion and o age om 18 o 65 yea s measu ed in
5-yea in e als con i med ou co e indings. Excluding ac ual weekly wo k hou s om he
models did no change ou co e indings.
6 Conclusion
This s udy aimed o explo e how he COVID-19 pandemic impac ed SWB—ope a ional-
ized as li e sa is ac ion and job sa is ac ion—among he solo sel -employed and employees
in Ge many. Al hough p e ious esea ch has examined he immedia e e ec s o he pan-
demic, he e has been li le esea ch on i s medium- e m consequences, on whe he SWB
eco e ed o con inued o de e io a e as he pandemic un olded, and on wha happened a e
he g adual li ing o es ic ions and e u n o no malcy. By le e aging na ionally ep esen-
a i e longi udinal da a co e ing he yea s 2019 o 2023, his s udy ex ends p io esea ch by
cap u ing he en i e cou se o he pandemic, om i s onse , h ough i s peak, o i s e en ual
decline. We ocused speci ically on he solo sel -employed, a g oup ha ends o ace g ea e
inancial p eca i y and ha was pa icula ly ulne able o he economic dis up ions caused
by he pandemic (Schulze Buscho & Emmle , 2021). Du ing he pandemic, he usual
ad an ages o sel -employmen , such as lexibili y and independence, we e g ea ly limi ed
by lockdowns and go e nmen es ic ions, while he nega i e aspec s, pa icula ly inancial
ins abili y, became mo e p ominen . This was e lec ed in heigh ened psychological s ess,
wi h his g oup epo ing inc eased conce ns abou inancial secu i y and wo sened men al
heal h (Caliendo e al., 2022; Pe e s & Schulze Buscho , 2025).
Ou indings show ha he SWB o bo h solo sel -employed indi iduals and employees
declined signi ican ly du ing he pandemic. No ably, he ini ial decline in li e sa is ac ion
was mo e p onounced han he dec ease in job sa is ac ion. This sugges s ha he b oade
li e challenges posed by he pandemic, such as heal h conce ns, social es ic ions, and
inancial unce ain y, may ha e impac ed o e all well-being mo e han job- ela ed well-
being. Mo e speci ically, we ound ha wi h he onse o he pandemic in 2020, declines in
li e sa is ac ion we e mode a e, and job sa is ac ion did no appea o be a ec ed by he pan-
demic- ela ed es ic ions. A subs an ial decline in bo h li e sa is ac ion and job sa is ac ion
became e iden in 2021 among employees and he solo sel -employed. This is in line wi h
i s e idence in Ge many showing ha he ad e se e ec s o he pandemic on loneliness,
dep ession, men al heal h, and SWB in ensi ied o e he cou se o he pandemic (Benke e
al., 2022; En inge & K öge , 2021; K iechel e al., 2024; Pa zina e al., 2024). Fu he , ou
esul s sugges ha he solo sel -employed we e disp opo iona ely mo e nega i ely a ec ed
by he pandemic in e ms o li e sa is ac ion. The decline in hei li e sa is ac ion was s eepe
in 2020 and in 2021, which ma ked he lowes le el o li e sa is ac ion du ing he obse -
a ion pe iod. Tu ning o he esul s on job sa is ac ion, we also de ec ed subs an ial di -
e ences be ween he wo g oups. In line wi h p e ious esea ch (Binde , 2017), he solo
sel -employed had highe job sa is ac ion le els han employees be o e he pandemic, bu
his gap closed in 2021. Al hough bo h g oups expe ienced lowe job sa is ac ion compa ed
wi h p e-pandemic le els, solo sel -employed indi iduals’ job-sa is ac ion dec eases we e
h ee imes highe compa ed wi h hose o employees. Hence, du ing he i s yea a e he
ou b eak o he pandemic (2020–2021), he solo sel -employed expe ienced a mo e se e e
decline in SWB han employees.
1 3
199
E. Pe e s e al.
Fu he mo e, as we explo ed SWB ajec o ies up o and including 2023, when go e n-
men es ic ions had al eady been li ed, accina ions we e widely a ailable, and li e g adu-
ally e u ned o no malcy, ou esul s p o ide insigh s in o how SWB de eloped du ing he
ading-ou pe iod. Li e sa is ac ion o bo h g oups inc eased mode a ely a e 2021. Thus,
he ading ou o he pandemic and he li ing o es ic ions had a posi i e e ec on he
li e sa is ac ion o he solo sel -employed and employees. Howe e , he li e sa is ac ion o
bo h g oups emained subs an ially lowe han p e-pandemic le els, which sugges s a slow
eco e y.
Su p ising di e ences in job sa is ac ion eme ged be ween employees and he solo sel -
employed. Whe eas employees’ job sa is ac ion con inued o decline in 2022 and 2023, ha
o he solo sel -employed appea s o ha e eco e ed by 2022. This highligh s he impo -
ance o explo ing di e en componen s o SWB, as hei dynamics may di e . These esul s
a e in line wi h hose o a s udy analyzing eelings o s ess and conce ns abou he u u e
o hei employmen among sel -employed indi iduals and employees in Ge many om
Ap il 2020 o July 2023 (Pe e s & Schulze Buscho , 2025). I ound ha in he pe iod
Ap il 2020–Ap il 2022, he sel -employed expe ienced highe le els o s ess due o hei
wo k si ua ion and mo e wo ies abou hei p o essional u u e compa ed wi h employees.
Howe e , whe eas s ess and wo ies dec eased o he sel -employed du ing ha pe iod,
employees’ s ess and wo ies inc eased and we e mo e p onounced as o Ap il 2022. One
explana ion could be he highe esilience o he sel -employed and he eeme gence o he
posi i e aspec s o sel -employmen , such as au onomy and lexibili y, which a e impo an
d i e s o job sa is ac ion among he sel -employed (Binde , 2017). By con as , employees
we e be e p o ec ed han he sel -employed agains income losses and unemploymen du -
ing he pandemic hanks o he sho - ime wo k allowance, which p obably cushioned he
decline in job sa is ac ion le els. Howe e , in 2022, d ama ic inc eases in in la ion, supply
bo lenecks, and unce ain ies slowed down he Ge man economy and possibly dec eased
employees’ job sa is ac ion due o unce ain y and s agna ing wages. Fu u e esea ch should
he e o e u he in es iga e why he job sa is ac ion ajec o ies o he solo sel -employed
and employees di e ed du ing he obse a ion pe iod.
Ou analyses clea ly show how SWB a ied h oughou he pandemic. Rela edly, p e i-
ous esea ch analyzing da a om he bi-annual Ge man Family Demog aphy Panel S udy
(FReDA) showed ha SWB exhibi ed dynamic pa e ns o change du ing he pandemic
and beyond, d i en by he mul iple c ises aced by he popula ion (K iechel e al., 2024).
To ully unde s and he impac o COVID-19 and concu en c ises—such as Russia’s wa
agains Uk aine—i is hus c ucial o conside he exac iming o he su eys, he pandemic-
ela ed measu es in place a ha ime, he se e i y o in ec ion wa es, and he p esence o
addi ional c ises (e.g., ising in la ion a es). Accoun ing o hese ac o s ensu es a mo e
accu a e in e p e a ion o SWB ends and b oade socie al impac s.
Despi e hese insigh s, his s udy has ce ain limi a ions. Fi s , we could no su icien ly
accoun o he he e ogenei y wi hin he g oup o solo sel -employed, which may ha e led o
di e en SWB ajec o ies o di e en indus ies and occupa ions. Fu u e esea ch should
he e o e in es iga e how he pandemic a ec ed SWB among g oups o solo sel -employed
wo ke s ha di e ed in e ms o hei income and p eca i y. Simila ly, u u e esea ch
should examine di e ences be ween a ious ca ego ies o sel -employmen , such as solo
sel -employed e sus sel -employed wi h employees, as well as oppo uni y-d i en e sus
necessi y-d i en sel -employmen .
1 3
200
Di e ging Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic on Subjec i e…
Second, in ou analyses, we did no di e en ia e by gende . Howe e , a compa ison
by gende could shed ligh on gende ed dynamics in SWB du ing he pandemic. S udies
show ha du ing he pandemic, women we e gene ally mo e nega i ely a ec ed in hei
SWB compa ed wi h men (Pa zina e al., 2023), and ha sel -employed women we e mo e
a ec ed in e ms o inancial losses han we e hei male coun e pa s (G aebe e al., 2021;
Seebaue e al., 2021). The e o e, u u e esea ch should conside he gende ed impac o he
pandemic on SWB among he sel -employed. As women a e mo e o en solo sel -employed,
his he e ogenei y should also be conside ed o achie e mo e in-dep h insigh s in o how he
pandemic a ec ed emale sel -employed pe sons.
Despi e hese limi a ions, his s udy p o ides no el insigh s in o how he SWB o he
solo sel -employed and employees in Ge many e ol ed du ing and a e he pandemic. The
indings o e a mo e nuanced unde s anding o how di e en employmen g oups we e
a ec ed, emphasizing he c ucial ole o indi idual income in explaining di e ences in li e
sa is ac ion. Ra he han sel -employmen alone d i ing dispa i ies be ween he wo g oups,
income s abili y was a key ac o . These insigh s a e pa icula ly ele an o shaping u u e
policy measu es o mi iga e he long- e m e ec s o he pandemic and o imp o e c isis
esponse s a egies. While go e nmen suppo p og ams o he sel -employed, such as he
Immedia e Assis ance P og am and he Res a Assis ance P og am, p o ided empo a y
elie , hey we e limi ed in scope and du a ion and o en hinde ed by bu eauc a ic hu dles
(Da id e al., 2022; G abka, 2021; K i ikos e al., 2022). The inadequacy o hese measu es
likely con ibu ed o he signi ican decline in SWB among solo sel -employed indi idu-
als. S eng hening social p o ec ions o he sel -employed—such as be e in eg a ion in o
social secu i y sys ems—could help alle ia e inancial unce ain y and exis en ial isks, ul i-
ma ely bu e ing some ad e se e ec s on li e sa is ac ion.
Supplemen a y In o ma ion The online e sion con ains supplemen a y ma e ial a ailable a h p s : / / d o i . o g
/ 1 0 . 1 0 0 7 / s 1 1 2 0 5 - 0 2 5 - 0 3 6 4 0 - 8 .
Da a A ailabili y The PASS da a a e a ailable o esea che s a h p s : / / d z . i a b . d e / e n / o u - d a a - p o d u c s / i n d i
i d u a l - a n d - h o u s e h o l d - d a a / p a s s /.
Decla a ions
Con lic o In e es The au ho s decla e ha he e a e no con lic s o in e es .
Open Access This a icle is licensed unde a C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 4.0 In e na ional License,
which pe mi s use, sha ing, adap a ion, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion in any medium o o ma , as long as
you gi e app op ia e c edi o he o iginal au ho (s) and he sou ce, p o ide a link o he C ea i e Commons
licence, and indica e i changes we e made. The images o o he hi d pa y ma e ial in his a icle a e
included in he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence, unless indica ed o he wise in a c edi line o he ma e ial.
I ma e ial is no included in he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence and you in ended use is no pe mi ed
by s a u o y egula ion o exceeds he pe mi ed use, you will need o ob ain pe mission di ec ly om he
copy igh holde . To iew a copy o his licence, isi h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/.
Re e ences
Adams-P assl, A., Bone a, T., Golin, M., & Rauh, C. (2020). Inequali y in he impac o he co ona i us
shock: E idence om eal ime su eys. Jou nal o Public Economics, 189., A icle 104245. h p s : / / d o
i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . j p u b e c o . 2 0 2 0 . 1 0 4 2 4 5
1 3
201
E. Pe e s e al.
Allison, P. D. (2009). Fixed e ec s eg ession models. SAGE Publica ions, Inc. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 4 1 3 5 / 9 7 8
1 4 1 2 9 9 3 8 6 9
Alon, T., Doepke, M., Olms ead-Rumsey, J., & Te il , M. (2020). The impac o COVID-19 on gende equal-
i y (NBER Wo king Pape 26947). Na ional Bu eau o Economic Resea ch. h p s : / / w w w . n b e . o g / s y s e
m / i l e s / w o k i n g _ p a p e s / w 2 6 9 4 7 / w 2 6 9 4 7 . p d
Bäh , S., F ode mann, C., Kohlnuss, J., Pa zina, A., S egmaie , J., & T appmann, M. (2022). COVID-19, sub-
jec i e well-being and basic income suppo in Ge many. Zei sch i Fü Sozial e o m, 68(1), 85–117.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1515/zs -2022-0005
Benke, C., Au en ie h, L. K., & Pané-Fa é, C. A. (2022). One yea a e he COVID-19 ou b eak in ge many:
Long- e m changes in dep ession, anxie y, loneliness, dis ess and li e sa is ac ion. Eu opean A chi es
o Psychia y and Clinical Neu oscience, 273, 289–299. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s00406-022-01400-0
Binde , M. (2017). En ep eneu ial success and subjec i e well-being: Wo ies abou he business explain
one’s well-being loss om sel -employmen (SOEPpape s on Mul idisciplina y Panel Da a Resea ch
947). DIW Be lin. h p s : / / w w w . d i w . d e / d o c u m e n s / p u b l i k a i o n e n / 7 3 / d i w _ 0 1 . c . 5 7 5 0 7 4 . d e / d i w _ s p 0 9 4 7 .
p d
Binde , M., & Coad, A. (2012). Li e sa is ac ion and sel -employmen : A ma ching app oach. Small Business
Economics, 40, 1009–1033. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11187-011-9413-9
Bonin, H., K ause-Pila us, A., Rinne, U., Koch, N., & Nenzel, C. (2022). Selbs s ändige E we bs ä igkei in
Deu schland (IZA Resea ch Repo No. 132). IZA– Ins i u e o Labo Economics. h p s : / / d o c s . i z a . o g /
e p o _ p d s / i z a _ e p o _ 1 3 2 . p d
B enke, K., & Beznoska, M. (2016). Solo-Selbs s ändige in Deu schland. S uk u en und E we bs e läu e
(BMAS-Fo schungsbe ich , 465). Fede al Minis y o Labou and Social A ai s. h p s : / / w w w . b m a s . d e /
D E / S e i c e / P u b l i k a i o n e n / F o s c h u n g s b e i c h e / b - 4 6 5 - s o l o - s e l b s a e n d i g e . h m l
B odeu , A., Cla k, A. E., Fleche, S., & Powd ha ee, N. (2021). COVID-19, lockdowns and well-being:
E idence om Google ends. Jou nal o Public Economics, 193., A icle 104346. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1
0 1 6 / j . j p u b e c o . 2 0 2 0 . 1 0 4 3 4 6
Bünning, M., Hipp, L., & Munnes, S. (2020). E we bsa bei in Zei en on Co ona (WZB E gebnisbe ich ).
Be lin Social Science Cen e . h p s : / / w w w . w z b . e u / s y s e m / i l e s / d o c s / d s i / a / E w e b s a b e i % 2 0 i n % 2 0 Z e
i e n % 2 0 o n % 2 0 C o o n a . p d
Caliendo, M., G aebe , D., K i ikos, A. S., & Seebaue , J. (2022). Pandemic dep ession: Co id-19 and he
men al heal h o he sel -employed. En ep eneu ship Theo y and P ac ice, 47(3), 788–830. h p s : / / d o i
. o g / 1 0 . 1 1 7 7 / 1 0 4 2 2 5 8 7 2 2 1 1 0 2 1 0 6
Conen, W., Schippe s, J., & Schulze Buscho , K. (2016). Sel -employed wi hou pe sonnel: Be ween eedom
and insecu i y (WSI S udy No. 05). Ins i u e o Economic and Social Resea ch. h p s : / / w w w . e c o n s o . e
u / b i s e a m / 1 0 4 1 9 / 2 2 5 4 2 8 / 1 / w s i - s u d y - 0 5 . p d
Da id, A., Dienes, C., Ga cía Schmid , A., Kay, R., Rosenbe ge , T., Sajons, C., Sänge , R., Schä e , S.,
& Te s iep, J. (2022). Un e nehme isches Handeln und s aa liche Un e s ü zungsmaßnahmen in de
COVID-19-Pandemie (ReCOVe y Policy B ie ). Ins i u A bei und Technik. h p s : / / w w w . i a . e u / a k u e l
l / e o e / 2 0 2 2 / d a i d _ e s i e p 0 2 . p d
Diene , E. (1984). Subjec i e well-being. Psychological Bulle in, 95(3), 542–575. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 3 7 / 0
0 3 3 - 2 9 0 9 . 9 5 . 3 . 5 4 2
Diene , E., & Chan, M. Y. (2011). Happy people li e longe : Subjec i e well-being con ibu es o heal h and
longe i y. Applied Psychology: Heal h and Well-Being, 3(1), 1–43. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 1 1 1 / j . 1 7 5 8 - 0 8 5
4 . 2 0 1 0 . 0 1 0 4 5 . x
Diene , E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smi h, H. L. (1999). Subjec i e well-being: Th ee decades o p og-
ess. Psychological Bulle in, 125(2), 276–302. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276
Diene , E., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Ad ances in subjec i e well-being esea ch. Na u e Human Beha io ,
2, 253–260. h ps://doi.o g/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
En inge , T., & K öge , H. (2021). Psychische Gesundhei im zwei en Co id-19 Lockdown in Deu schland
(SOEPpape s on Mul idisciplina y Panel Da a Resea ch, 1136). DIW Be lin. h p s : / / w w w . d i w . d e / d o c u
m e n s / p u b l i k a i o n e n / 7 3 / d i w _ 0 1 . c . 8 1 9 6 0 1 . d e / d i w _ s p 1 1 3 6 . p d
Fachinge , U. (2007). Ve siche ungsp lich übe ällig: Ren en e siche ung. Wi scha sdiens , 87(6), 349–
350. h p s : / / w w w . e c o n s o . e u / b i s e a m / 1 0 4 1 9 / 6 8 5 3 3 / 1 / 7 3 4 5 2 9 2 4 4 . p d
Fede al S a is ical O ice (2024, Janua y 2). CORRECTION: Employmen eaches a new high in 2023 [P ess
elease]. h p s : / / w w w . d e s a i s . d e / E N / P e s s / 2 0 2 4 / 0 1 / P E 2 4 _ 0 0 1 _ 1 3 3 2 1 . h m l
Fe e -i-Ca bonell, A., & F ij e s, P. (2004). How impo an is me hodology o he es ima es o he de e -
minan s o happiness? The Economic Jou nal, 114(497), 641–659. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 1 1 1 / j . 1 4 6 8 - 0 2 9
7 . 2 0 0 4 . 0 0 2 3 5 . x
F ode mann, C., G unau, P., Haepp, T., Mackeben, J., Ru , K., S e es, S., & Wange , S. (2020). Wie Co ona
den A bei sall ag e ände ha (IAB-Ku zbe ich , 13/2020). Ins i u e o Employmen Resea ch.
h ps://doku.iab.de/ku zbe /2020/kb1320.pd
1 3
202
Di e ging Pa hs? The Impac o he COVID-19 Pandemic on Subjec i e…
G abka, M. (2021). Einkommensungleichhei s agnie lang is ig, sink abe wäh end de Co ona-Pandemie
leich . DIW-Wochenbe ich , 18. DIW Be lin. h p s : / / w w w . d i w . d e / d o c u m e n s / p u b l i k a i o n e n / 7 3 / d i w _ 0 1
. c . 8 1 7 4 7 3 . d e / 2 1 - 1 8 - 1 . p d
G aebe , D., K i ikos, A. S., & Seebaue , J. (2021). COVID-19: A c isis o he emale sel -employed. Jou nal
o Popula ion Economics, 34, 1141–1187. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s00148-021-00849-y
Hanschke, K., & S auß, S. (2021, Ma ch 5). Sie s e ben s ill. FAZ. h p s : / / w w w . a z . n e / a k u e l l / e u i l l e o n / d e b
a e n / i n - d e - k a n - s a s s e - i n - b e l i n - z e i g - s i c h - d a s - e s a g e n - d e - w i s c h a s p o l i i k - 1 7 2 1 8 1 3 2 . h m l
Huebene , M., Waigh s, S., & Spiess, C. K. (2024). Well-being h oughou he COVID-19 pandemic in Ge -
many: Gende ed e ec s o dayca e and school closu es (BiB Wo king Pape , 06/2024). Fede al Ins i u e
o Popula ion Resea ch. h p s : / / w w w . b i b . b u n d . d e / P u b l i k a i o n / 2 0 2 4 / p d / W e l l - b e i n g - h o u g h o u - h e - C
O V I D - 1 9 - p a n d e m i c - i n - G e m a n y - G e n d e e d - e e c s - o - d a y c a e - a n d - s c h o o l - c l o s u e s . p d ? _ _ b l o b = p u b l i
c a i o n F i l e & = 2
Jaschke, P., Kosyako a, Y., & Kuche, C. (2023). Men al heal h and well-being in he i s yea o he COVID-
19 pandemic among di e en popula ion subg oups: E idence om ep esen a i e longi udinal da a in
Ge many. B i ish Medical Jou nal Open, 13(6). h ps://doi.o g/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071331. A icle
071331Wal he , L., Goßne , L. Jacobsen, J., Ta, T-M-T, Hahn, E., Hans, S., & Bajbouj, M.
Johansson Se ä, I., Vinbe , S., No denma k, M., & S andh, M. (2015). Subjec i e well-being among he
sel -employed in eu ope: Mac oeconomy, gende and immig an s a us. Small Business Economics, 46,
239–253. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11187-015-9682-9
K iechel, L., Buja d, M., & Hudde, A. (2024). The olle coas e o subjec i e well-being in imes o mul iple
c ises: E idence o i e wa es o bi-annual panel da a o FReDA su ey (BiB Wo king Pape 10/2024).
Fede al Ins i u e o Popula ion Resea ch. h p s : / / w w w . b i b . b u n d . d e / P u b l i k a i o n / 2 0 2 4 / p d / T h e - o l l e c o
a s e - o - s u b j e c i e - w e l l b e i n g - i n - i m e s - o - m u - l i p l e - c i s e s - E i d e n c e - o - i e - w a e s - o - b i - a n n u a l - P a n e
l - d a a - o - F R e D A - s u e y . p d ? _ _ b l o b = p u b l i c a i o n F i l e & = 2
K i ikos, A., G aebe , D., & Seebaue , J. (2020). Co ona-Pandemie wi d zu K ise ü Selbs s ändige (DIW
ak uell No. 47). DIW Be lin. h p s : / / w w w . d i w . d e / d o c u m e n s / p u b l i k a i n e n / 7 3 / d i w _ 0 1 . c . 7 9 1 6 7 9 . d e / d i w
_ a k u e l l _ 4 7 . p d
K i ikos, A., G aebe , D., & Seebaue , J. (2021). Co ona-Pandemie d äng Selbs s ändige e meh zu
Geschä sau gabe– F auen s ä ke be o en (DIW ak uell No. 69). DIW Be lin. h p s : / / w w w . d i w . d e / d
o c u m e n s / p u b l i k a i o n e n / 7 3 / d i w _ 0 1 . c . 8 2 1 5 3 4 . d e / d i w _ a k u e l l _ 6 9 . p d
McMahan, E. A., & Es es, R. J. (2011). The ela ionship be ween subjec i e well-being and heal h: A e iew o
he li e a u e. Jou nal o Happiness S udies, 12(1), 99–118. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10902-010-9204-9
Nieuwenhuis, R., & Ye kes, M. A. (2021). Wo ke s’ well-being in he con ex o he i s yea o he COVID-
19 pandemic. Communi y Wo k & Family, 24(2), 226–235. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 0 8 0 / 1 3 6 6 8 8 0 3 . 2 0 2 1 . 1 8
8 0 0 4 9
No denma k, M., Lands ad, B. J., Tjulin, Å., & Vinbe g, S. (2023). Li e sa is ac ion among sel -employed
people in di e en wel a e egimes du ing he COVID-19 pandemic: Signi icance o household inances
and conce ns abou wo k. In e na ional Jou nal o En i onmen al Resea ch and Public Heal h, 20(6).
h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/ije ph20065141. A icle 5141.
Pa zina, A., Collischon, M., & K oh, J. (2023). The gende ed e ec s o COVID-19 on well-being: A house-
hold pe spec i e [p ep in ]. OSF. h ps://doi.o g/10.31235/os .io/h2 a7
Pa zina, A., Collischon, M., Ho mann, R., & Ob izan, M. (2024). Men al heal h in Ge many be o e, du ing
and a e he COVID-19 pandemic. MedRxi . h ps://doi.o g/10.1101/2024.06.21.24309286. [p ep in ].
Pe e s, E., & Schulze Buscho , K. (2025). K ise Ohne ende?? Die olgen de COVID-19 pandemie ü die
selbs s ändigen. In B. Kohl auch, E. Pe e s, & K. Schulze Buscho (Eds.), Was on Co ona Üb ig ble-
ib – E we bsa bei , soziale ungleichhei , gesellscha liche olgen (pp. 7–20). Campus.
Pe e s, E., Reimann, M., & Diewald, M. (2023). The s ess and esou ces o highe s a us hypo heses in ligh
o COVID-19: E ec s on wo k-li e con lic and sel - a ed heal h. Soziale Wel , 74(1), 88–115. h p s : / / d
o i . o g / 1 0 . 5 7 7 1 / 0 0 3 8 - 6 0 7 3 - 2 0 2 3 - 1 - 8 8
Rabe-Heske h, S., & Sk ondal, A. (2012). Mul ile el and longi udinal modeling using S a a (3 d ed.). S a a.
Schulze Buscho , K. (2016). Solo-Selbs s ändigkei in Deu schland. Ak uelle Re o mop ionen (WSI Policy
B ie No. 4). Ins i u e o Social and Economic Resea ch. h p s : / / w w w . w s i . d e / d e / a u s - d e a i l . h m ? s y n c
_ i d = H B S - 0 0 6 3 1 4
Schulze Buscho , K. (2018). Selbs s ändigkei und hyb ide E we bs o men. Sozialpoli ische Ges al ungsop-
ionen (WSI Policy B ie No. 21). Ins i u e o Social and Economic Resea ch. h p s : / / w w w . w s i . d e / d e /
a u s - d e a i l . h m ? s y n c _ i d = H B S - 0 0 6 8 2 4
Schulze Buscho , K., & Emmle , H. (2021). Selbs s ändige in de Co ona-K ise (WSI Policy B ie No. 60).
Ins i u e o Social and Economic Resea ch. h p s : / / w w w . b o e c k l e . d e / d e / a u s - d e a i l . h m ? s y n c _ i d = H B
S - 0 0 8 1 1 2
1 3
203
E. Pe e s e al.
Seebaue , J., K i ikos, A. S., & G aebe , D. (2021). Wa um Vo allem weibliche selbs s ändige Ve lie e innen
de Co id-19-K ise Sind. DIW Wochenbe ich , 15, 261–269. h p s : / / w w w . d i w . d e / d e / d i w _ 0 1 . c . 8 1 5 7 9 4
. d e / p u b l i k a i o n e n / w o c h e n b e i c h e / 2 0 2 1 _ 1 5 _ 3 / w a u m _ o _ a l l e m _ w e i b l i c h e _ s e l b s s a e n d i g e _ e l i e e i
n n e n _ d e _ c o i d - 1 9 - k i s e _ s i n d . h m l
S iel, C., K i ikos, A. S., Block, J., & P iem, M. (2021). So o hil e ü Selbs s ändige wi k o allem posi i ,
wenn sie asch gewäh wi d (DIW ak uell No. 60) DIW Be lin. h p s : / / w w w . d i w . d e / d e / d i w _ 0 1 . c . 8 1 2
7 4 6 . d e / p u b l i k a i o n e n / d i w _ a k u - e l l / 2 0 2 1 _ 0 0 6 0 / s o o h i l e _ u e _ s e l b s s a e n d i g e _ w i k _ o _ a l l e m _ p o s
i - i _ _ w e n n _ s i e _ a s c h _ g e w a e h _ w i d . h m l
S igli z, J. E., Sen, A., & Fi oussi, J. P. (2009). Repo by he Commission on he Measu emen o Economic
Pe o mance and Social P og ess. h p s : / / e c . e u o p a . e u / e u o s a / d o c u m e n s / 8 1 3 1 7 2 1 / 8 1 3 1 7 7 2 / S i g l i z -
S e n - F i o u s s i - C o m m i s s i o n - e p o . p d
To ès, O., Benza i, A., Fisch, C., Muke jee, J., Swalhi, A., & Thu ik, R. (2022). Risk o bu nou in F ench
en ep eneu s du ing he COVID-19 c isis. Small Business Economics, 58(1), 1–23. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 .
1 0 0 7 / s 1 1 1 8 7 - 0 2 1 - 0 0 5 1 6 - 2
T appmann, M., Bäh , S., Bes e, J., Ebe l, A., F ode mann, C., Gunde , S., Schwa z, S., Teichle , N., Unge ,
S., & Wenzig, C. (2019). Da a esou ce p o ile: Panel s udy labou ma ke and social secu i y (PASS).
In e na ional Jou nal o Epidemiology, 48(5), 1411–1411g. h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/ije/dyz041
Ve meylen, G., Wilkens, M., Bile a, I., Pa en -Thi ion, A., & Con e as, R., R (2017). Explo ing sel -employ-
men in he Eu opean union. Eu o ound. Publica ions O ice o he Eu opean Union. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0
. 2 8 0 6 / 6 5 1 9 1 7
Webe , T., Ei e, F., & Adascali ei, D. (2024). Sel -employmen in he EU: Job quali y and de elopmen s in
social p o ec ion. Eu o ound Publica ions O ice o he Eu opean Union. h p s : / / w w w . e u o o u n d . e u o p
a . e u / e n / p u b l i c a i o n s / 2 0 2 4 / s e l - e m p l o y m e n - e u - j o b - q u a l i y - a n d - d e e l o p m e n s - s o c i a l - p o e c i o n
Woold idge, J. M. (2010). Econome ic analysis o c oss sec ion and panel da a. The MIT P ess.
Yue, W., & Cowling, M. (2021). The Co id-19 lockdown in he uni ed Kingdom and subjec i e well-being:
Ha e he sel -employed su e ed mo e due o hou s and income educ ions? In e na ional Small Busi-
ness Jou nal, 39(2), 93–108. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0266242620986763
Zoch, G., Bächmann, A. C., & Vica i, B. (2021). Reduced well-being du ing he COVID-19 pandemic– The
ole o wo king condi ions. Gende Wo k & O ganiza ion, 29(6), 1969–1990. h p s : / / d o i . o g / 1 0 . 1 1 1 1 /
g w a o . 1 2 7 7 7
Publishe ’s No e Sp inge Na u e emains neu al wi h ega d o ju isdic ional claims in published maps and
ins i u ional a ilia ions.
1 3
204
