Diverging Paths? A Comparative Look at Childcare Policies in <scp>J</scp>apan, <scp>S</scp>outh <scp>K</scp>orea and <scp>T</scp>aiwan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article compares state policies to support childcare in J apan, S outh K orea and T aiwan, using fuzzy set ideal type analysis to determine the nature of institutional arrangements with respect to labour, money and time provisions. We then note their implications for familialization and defamilialization in the three countries. Our analysis suggests a common pattern towards the increased use of financial support amongst the three countries over time; however, this commonality does not mean their childcare policies are converging, as the financial supports differ in focus, with J apan concentrating on familialization by valuing family care, and K orea exclusively employing policy to facilitate the use of market‐based care services. For its part, Taiwan has been strengthening familialization by increasing the leave compensation to value time off to provide care. The different labour, money and time dimensions vis‐à‐vis the familialization/defamilialization matrix suggest varying implications of institutional arrangements for gender.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".