MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139849346 · doi:10.1162/adev_a_00157

Population Aging and the Three Demographic Dividends in Asia

2021· article· en· W3139849346 on OpenAlexaff
Naohiro Ogawa, Norma Mansor, Sang-Hyop Lee, Michael R.M. Abrigo, Tahir Aris

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Development Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographic dividendChinaAsset (computer security)DividendEconomicsDemographic economicsAge structurePopulation ageingPopulationDevelopment economicsWork (physics)Economic growthGeographyDemographySociologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study first examines the trends in age structural shifts in selected Asian economies over the period 1950–2050 and analyzes their impact on economic growth in terms of the first and second demographic dividends computed from the system of National Transfer Accounts. Then, using the National Transfer Accounts, we analyze the effect of the age structural shifts on the pattern of intergenerational transfers in Japan; the Republic of Korea; and Taipei,China. A brief comparison of the results reveals that, in the next few decades, the latter two are likely to follow in Japan's footsteps by increasing public transfers and asset reallocations, and by reducing familial transfers, particularly among older persons. Next, we consider a newly defined demographic dividend, which is generated through the use of the untapped work capacity of healthy older persons and to which we refer as “the silver” or “the third” demographic dividend. By drawing upon microlevel datasets obtained from Japan and Malaysia, we calculate the magnitude of the impact of that dividend on macroeconomic growth in each of the two economies, concluding that while in Japan the expected effect is substantial, in Malaysia it will take several decades before the country can enjoy comparable benefits.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 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

Citations53
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Development ReviewSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207