MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011278578 · doi:10.1177/1745499920910581

Higher education in a depopulating society: Survival strategies of Japanese universities

2020· article· en· W3011278578 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yushi Inaba

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Comparative and International Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelocationHigher educationDiversification (marketing strategy)Economic growthEast AsiaPolitical sciencePopulationQuarter (Canadian coin)International educationDemographic economicsRegional scienceBusinessGeographyEconomicsSociologyChinaMarketingDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Internationally and domestically, depopulation and the decrease of student enrollment caused are becoming an issue of interest in higher education, especially in regions such as east Europe, south Europe, and East Asia. This article analyzes strategies of Japanese universities to tackle depopulation issues in Japan. The 18-year-old bracket population has been halved for the last quarter century, and steep depopulation currently occurs in Japan. Such demographic changes strongly affect the Japanese higher education system. Through document and secondary data analysis, five major strategies were identified: subject diversification; merger (vertical and/or horizontal integration); campus relocation; take-over by local authorities; and closure. From these findings, a framework to describe the strategic decision-making of Japanese universities that consisted of environmentally determined exogenous factors, endogenous factors of university, and strategic options in managing the contraction of student enrollment was proposed. Finally implications on each strategy were discussed both in domestic and international contexts.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.540
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.033 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in Comparative and International EducationSame topicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality StudiesFrench-language works237,207