MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392873258 · doi:10.1017/9781788213929.007

Continuing Challenges, Contemporary Crises

2022· other· en· W4392873258 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nicholas Timmins, biographer of the welfare state, reflected that it was not only Beveridge's proposals that were remarkable, but also their enduring resonance with the parameters of political and public debate on the welfare state today (Timmins 2017). The thorny issue of how best to manage housing benefits in a country of vast geographical inequalities in housing costs; the difficulties defining poverty; the fair and equal treatment of women; and the significant challenges reconciling a rights-based system with sufficient benefits to sustain a healthy standard of living without disincentivizing either work or saving. Have any of these challenges been satisfactorily addressed? An eye to the violence of a decade of austerity and the crisis of Covid-19 suggests not. Both eroded hard-won gains for equality, not just in gender but across many protected characteristics. Where the burden of care disproportionately falls on women, women will always be more vulnerable to cuts in welfare and social security. Women will also be more vulnerable to the consequences of a global health crisis where care needs increase both in the public and private realm. Finally, both fiscal austerity and Covid-19 showed with painful clarity the consequences of underinvestment and disinvestment in the health and social care workforce. Beveridge wanted to secure “improved labour standards, economic advancement, and social security” for all (1942: 171). And he did, to a point. But the emerging inequalities first evidenced in the Black Report, the political squabbling over what is fair and the continued refusal to face up to the consequences of uneven power for uneven life chances have made a renewal of Beveridge's survey of the five giants more critical than ever. But where should our attention now be focused? The early deaths of our children, the causes and consequences of their increasing weight and the mental health epidemic are clear alarm bells. There is an obvious need to dismantle the structures that not only disadvantage people over their lifetime but make them less able to manage the consequences of a lifetime of disadvantage in increasing old age. We are living longer but often in poorer health. The problem of age(ism) has made that only too clear. But these are not the only challenges facing society, nor do they capture the extent of emerging crises that will threaten health and well-being for decades to come.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0180.023
Scholarly communication0.0190.028
Open science0.0030.015
Research integrity0.0150.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.005

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism→French-language works237,207→