How much would reduced emigration mitigate ageing in Norway?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population ageing is a topic of great concern in many countries. To counteract the negative effects of ageing, increased fertility or immigration are often proposed as demographic remedies. Changed emigration is, however, rarely mentioned. We explore whether reduced emigration could mitigate ageing in a country like Norway. Using cohort-component methods, we create hypothetical future demographic scenarios with lower emigration rates, and we present (prospective) old-age dependency ratios, population growth and shares of immigrants. We also estimate howmuch fertility and immigrationwould have to change to yield the same effects. In different scenarios, emigration is reduced for the total population and for subgroups, while also taking into account that reduced emigration of natives will entail reduced return migration. Our results show that even a dramatic 50% decrease in annual emigration would mitigate ageing only slightly, by lowering the old-age dependency ratio in 2060 from 0.54 to 0.52. This corresponds to the anti-ageing effect of 15% higher fertility, or one-quarter extra child per woman.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".