Unveiling the Social Fabric: The Impact of China’s Rural Subsistence Allowance System on Community Isolation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates welfare stigma and its underlying mechanisms using data from the China Family Panel Studies Project. By employing propensity score matching, the research examines how indicators such as neighborhood relationships and interactions with relatives reflect social isolation within rural households. The analysis reveals critical determinants affecting rural families’ access to subsistence allowance assistance and explores the resultant social isolation effects within China’s rural subsistence allowance system. Our findings indicate that several factors—including family income, housing conditions, employment status, age demographics, health status, and village characteristics (such as landform and population density)—significantly impact the likelihood of receiving subsistence allowances. Additionally, the study highlights that the rural subsistence allowance system contributes to diminished neighborhood cohesion and fewer interactions with relatives among beneficiaries. The research further identifies a pronounced targeting bias within the district targeting mechanism of the allowance program, which is corroborated through robustness testing. Overall, this study provides novel insights into the relationship between welfare stigma and social isolation, offering valuable empirical evidence and policy recommendations to enhance the effectiveness of rural subsistence allowance policies in China.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it