Gender and path-shifting changes in a "hybrid" welfare regime: Argentina in comparative perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper focuses on welfare regime change and the constitution of a new social paradigm in Argentina, with particular attention to the role that ideas and their institutionalization play in reconfiguring social policy. Using a gender perspective, I analyze, the emergence of the risks associated with the decline of the male breadwinner/female caregiver family form in Argentina and the resulting “crisis of care” (Daly & Lewis, 2000). My hypothesis is that the Argentinean welfare state is evolving towards a model more readily identified as the liberal residual type of welfare regime in which the market is an important provider of welfare, with all the negative consequences for equity, which that entails. Yet the current situation consists of a dual system of welfare provision: the old income-maintenance model, still focused primarily on the male breadwinner- and a new liberal residual component, based on mean-tested programs. I argue that the crisis of the male breadwinner family form and the emergence of dual-earner families (and women head of households) are the result not only of changes in contextual factors like demographics (ageing population) and/or women’s participation in the labor force.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".