Equality and Economic Security Take a Hit: The Index of Economic Well-Being for Selected OECD Countries, 1980-2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report presents new estimates of the Index of Economic Well-Being and its four domains (consumption flows, stocks of wealth, economic equality, and economic security) for fourteen OECD countries for the 1980-2014 period. It finds that in 2014 Norway had the highest level of economic well-being and Spain the lowest. Canada ranked eleventh among the fourteen countries. Over the 1980-2014 period, Australia enjoyed the most rapid increase in economic well-being in absolute terms, and Italy the slowest. In all fourteen countries, over the 1980-2014 period, there was growth in the consumption flows index and the stocks of wealth index. Over this same period, the economic security index and the economic equality index were largely stagnant in most countries. Most importantly, in all fourteen countries except France, the IEWB grew slower than GDP per capita, a measure that is often used to provide indications into the state of well-being in a given country. According to our estimates, economic well-being, therefore, has not advanced as rapidly as GDP per capita. Furthermore, since 2008, growth in economic well-being has been slower than growth over the 1980-2008 period for nine of the fourteen countries considered, with two countries showing negative growth (Italy and Spain).
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".