MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755270779 · doi:10.3326/pse.41.3.4

Patterns of welfare-to-employment transitions of Croatian Guaranteed Minimum Benefit recipients: a preliminary study

2017· article· en· W2755270779 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Teo Matković, Dinka Caha

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Sector Economics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)WelfareDemographic economicsSocial assistanceWork (physics)Statutory lawSocial capitalSocial WelfareLabour economicsDebtBusinessEconomicsEconomic growthPolitical scienceGeographyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we explore the transitions of social assistance beneficiaries to employment in Croatia.Data was sourced from the social welfare register for 208 persons from the 2015 cohort of new, unemployed social assistance recipients in one Centre for Social Welfare, their outcomes tracked until June 2017.About a quarter of the recipients became employed within one year, in most cases with wages slightly higher than the statutory minimum.Out of them, about a quarter relapsed into social assistance status within a year.Following the World Bank Employment Barriers approach, we examine whether outcomes are associated with disincentives to work (inactivity trap), lack of work-related capabilities, or gendered engagement with in-household work.We found the average participation tax rate (PTR) for recipients to stand at 57%, yet no effect of PTR, benefit level, debt or PTR level on transition to employment was identified.With respect to capabilities, the role of human capital (vocational in particular), work experience and age turned out to be consistent with prior research.Substitution of inhouse work is consistent with the finding that women are less likely to get employed if living in a household with dependents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Sector EconomicsSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207