MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596126555 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.40.4.617

Working their Way Out of Poverty? Gendered Employment in Three Welfare States

2009· article· en· W2596126555 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Maureen Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyWelfare stateWorking poorWelfare reformSingle mothersIncome SupportWelfareChild supportDemographic economicsEconomicsWork (physics)Labour economicsEconomic growthPolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Governments increasingly view earning and saving as the main solutions to low-income and debt, but is it feasible to expect all parents to work their way out of poverty? This paper compares gendered patterns of income, and state support for earning and caring in three similar welfare states: Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Relying on recent OECD statistics and national studies, the paper examines employment patterns, poverty rates and state support, noting similarities but also wide variations by gender, family configuration and country. The paper argues that increases in female employment have modified household incomes but the changes have been insufficient to counteract gendered patterns of unpaid work and the challenges women face when parenting alone. Especially mothers find themselves working in low-paid jobs with little hope of job mobility and their economic circumstances often vary by marital status and levels of state support. In Canada and New Zealand, few lone mothers can work their way out of poverty but Australia offers longer support for mothering at home and enhanced in-work benefits that reduce poverty rates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.209
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207