Social capital and its relevance to the Japanese‐model welfare society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current debates and initiatives relating to the welfare regime in Japan focus on the contributions of informal and community networks. In this article, we adopt the concept of social capital, which is assessed according to three categories – structural social capital, experiential individual social capital and anticipatory individual social capital – in order to evaluate the assumptions and strengths of community in Japan. The findings are based on a small‐scale survey conducted in the Greater Kobe area in 2002. The study revealed that the level of structural social capital is ‘average’ and the level of experiential individual social capital is ‘rather low’. However, the anticipatory individual social capital, which is the expectation of future assistance whether conditional or unconditional, is higher than the experiential individual social capital. The findings suggest that, in Japan, people's belief that they will receive assistance in the future has a significant impact on their level of achievement. Such findings may help us understand the nature of the welfare regime in Japan: it depends on a sense of general trust, which effectively supports the informal groups and community networks that provide assistance to their members.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".