MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200164650 · doi:10.1111/twec.12334

Labour Migration and Economic Growth in East and South‐East Asia

2015· article· en· W3200164650 on OpenAlexaff
Terrie Walmsley, Angel Aguiar, S. Amer Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Economy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemittanceEast AsiaEconomicsEconomic shortageDevelopment economicsPosition (finance)Net migration rateChinaEconomic growthPopulationPolitical sciencePopulation growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract East and South‐East Asia will face major demographic changes over the next few decades with many countries’ labour forces starting to decline, while others experience higher labour force growth as populations and/or participation rates increase. A well‐managed labour migration strategy presents itself as a mechanism for ameliorating the impending labour shortages in some East Asia–Pacific countries, while providing an opportunity for other countries with excess labour to provide migrant workers who will contribute to the development of the home country through greater remittance flows. This paper examines such migration policy options using a global dynamic economic simulation approach and finds that allowing migrants to respond to the major demographic changes occurring in Asia over the next 50 years would be beneficial to most economies in the region in terms of real incomes and real GDP over the 2007–50 period. Such a policy could deeply affect the net migration position of a country. Countries that were net recipients under current migration policies might become net senders under the more liberal policy regime.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations34
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld EconomySame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207