MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3124551010

Getting Older, Getting Poorer?: A Study of the Earnings, Pensions, Assets and Living Arrangements of Older People in Nine Countries

2002· article· en· W3124551010 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bernard Casey, Atsuhiro Yamada

Notice bibliographique

RevueOECD labour market and social policy occasional papers · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEarningsSpousePolitical scienceWorking populationConsumption (sociology)PopulationWelfare economicsDemographic economicsHumanitiesSociologyEconomicsDemographyArt
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Aging involves not one but several transitions. People move from working to not working, from relying upon labor income to relying on transfers. They also tend to live in smaller households, not only because any children will have moved away but also because, at some stage, a spouse dies. People move homes and sometimes they move back to live with their now grown-up children. This paper examines the wellbeing of people as they pass through the later stages of their life and through different labor market statuses and domestic statuses. It examines and compares nine countries - Canada, Finland, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States. It draws particularly from a special analysis of micro-data sets that report on incomes, but it complements this with an analysis of data on wealth, on consumption, on housing and on the use of in-kind services provided by the state. The paper is original in more than one way. First, its analysis is based upon the individual rather than the household. This means both that the importance of own-income sources can be evaluated and that intrafamilial transfers are observed. Second, it includes Japan, a country where both employment patterns and living patterns for older people are substantially different to those of many other OECD countries. Many more work, and many more live in multigenerational households. Principal findings are that, although income does fall with age, people over retirement age are not substantially less well off than people of working age. The difference is further reduced when the absence of work-related expenses and older peoples generally lower housing expenses are taken into account. Remarkably, and regardless of the public-private mix of pensions and the importance or otherwise of work, the income of retirement-age people, relative to that of working-age people, is rather similar across all nine countries. Nevertheless, some older people, particularly old single women, fare less well, and this is the case in all nine countries. Widowhood reduces wellbeing, particularly because in many countries all or part of the husbands pension is lost, but also because single people do not enjoy the scale economies enjoyed by couple households. Those old single people who move back with their adult relatives tend to fare much better than those who stay living alone. Consumption of in-kind services provided by the state, such as social care and especially of health care services, can substantially enhance the income of the oldest of the old. This needs to be taken into account when relative wellbeing is assessed. The extent to which such services are provided cost-free makes comparisons between countries as different as the United States and Sweden quite fraught. Analysis such as was carried out here on a one-off basis needs to be repeated to monitor changes in wellbeing in old age. This is important because pension policy is being changed. Older people are being encouraged to work longer and private rather than public provision is being promoted.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,122
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,243

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,269
Écart entre enseignants0,258 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations66
Publié2002
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOECD labour market and social policy occasional papersMême sujetMigration, Aging, and Tourism StudiesTravaux en français237 207