The Evolving Retirement Income Package: Trends in Adequacy and Equality in Nine OECD Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1998, the OECD issued a report, Maintaining Prosperity in an Ageing Society, on the widespread policy implications of ageing. This study is a background paper for one of the follow-up studies, Ageing and Income: Financial Resources and Retirement in Nine OECD countries, which was published by OECD in 2001. Canada, Finland, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States participated in this activity. Japan played a major role in initiating and funding the project. This paper explores various questions related to the income situation of persons at retirement-age It is based on the most comprehensive data available for the nine participating countries (including, for the first time, Japanese data) in a consistent and comparative way. Recently developed techniques were employed to examine the interactions between the evolution of the retirement income package, and trends in income adequacy and equality. There are four main ... En 1998, l’OCDE a publie un rapport, Preserver la prosperite dans une societe vieillissante, sur les consequences importantes du vieillissement sur les politiques. Cette etude a servi de document de base pour une des etudes qui a suivi, Vieillissement et revenus – Les ressources des retraites dans 9 pays de l’OCDE, qui a ete publiee par l’OCDE en 2001. Le Canada, la Finlande, l’Allemagne, l’Italie, le Japon, les Pays-Bas, la Suede, le Royaume-Uni et les Etats-Unis ont participe a cette activite. Le Japon a lui joue un role majeur dans le lancement et le financement du projet. Ce document explore diverses questions liees a la situation financiere des personnes en âge de la retraite. Il se base sur les donnees les plus completes disponibles pour les neuf pays participant (y compris, pour la premiere fois, les donnees du Japon) d’une maniere comparative et constante. Des techniques recemment elaborees ont ete utilisees pour examiner la relation qui existe entre l’evolution de ...
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".