Economic Consequences of Retiree Concentrations: A Review of North American Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The study of patterns of residential mobility among individuals around the age of retirement has led to the recognition that for many reasons-climate and cost of living being the most frequently cited-settlement patterns of comparatively affluent retirees will often differ from those of the working-age population. Increasingly, localities may often seek this type of relocation, on the theory that the newcomers will provide a boost to the local economy through expenditures and tax payments. In addition, there is often the perception that such a strategy will not cost the community much in the way of locally provided public services. The past several years have witnessed a substantial increase in efforts to provide some quantitative estimates on the magnitude of these hypothetical effects. DESIGN AND METHODS: This article aims at providing a summary assessment of such analyses, incorporating research projects in both the United States and Canada. RESULTS: Practically all such studies may be characterized as being exclusively short term in nature; that is, they focus more or less exclusively on the near-term implications of retiree inmigration, which do tend to be overwhelmingly positive from an economic or fiscal perspective. IMPLICATIONS: In general, this area of inquiry may be characterized by a paucity of knowledge regarding the longer term effects of such population movement. There has been no effort to analyze the aging in place of the erstwhile newcomers or the failure of the retirement migration process to generate other than a plethora of opportunities for comparatively low-skill, low-wage service employment. Policies intended to foster amenity migration as an economic development tool would greatly benefit from longer term analyses of the economic implications of the process.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".