Inter-provincial Migration of Income Among Canada's Older Population: 1996-2001
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much of the literature on internal migration in Canada has focused on the determinants of migration, as opposed to the impacts. Yet, it is likely that migration has a large impact upon the distribution and re-distribution of income across regions. Such impacts may be magnified within the older population, as their relocation involves the transfer of savings such as pensions, retirement investments, or other income supplements from province to province. Using methods proposed by Plane (1999), income-based versions of demographic effectiveness and efficiency are applied to evaluate the movement of non-earned income in the Canadian context among Canada's older population. The analysis uses data drawn from the 2001 Census, and focuses upon the older population (aged 60+ in 2001), distinguishing between three types of income, including (i) Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplements; (ii) Canada/Quebec pension plan benefits; and (iii) Retirement Investment income. In addition to evaluating the magnitude of income redistribution, the impact of primary, return, and onward migration on regional income distributions is also evaluated, illustrating the importance of return migration in transferring incomes over space.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".