Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last two decades or so, major Western societies have remoulded the institutional set-up by which they are deailing with social risks related to frailty during old age. While the 20th century had brought a transnational tendency towards the establishment of elderly care ‘going public’, the proliferation of more market-based services brings confusion into the societal norm-set underlying the aforementioned tendency. Marketisation has placed the emphasis on economic values engrained in liberal worldviews, leading into a new welfare culture that devaluates universalism and reemphasises the sovereignty of the individual. However, the new cult of the individual produces contradictory signals. Drawing on an encompassing study on the ‘culture of welfare markets’ in elderly care provision, covering two (post-)liberal and two (post-corporatist) welfare regimes (Canada, Britain; France, Germany), the paper looks at these fuzzy developments in order to assess the cultural embeddedness of what can be referred to as the mixed economy of elderly care. The analysis, charting major patterns of both institutional change and public communication around it, elucidates that we currently are facing a permanent struggle between liberal values and (renewed) elements of the ‘going-public-agenda’ proliferating over the 1970s and 1980s, that is, a hybrid and ‘nervous’ cultural configuration in which senior social citizenship remains an issue, albeit on precarious foundations.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".