MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406052083 · doi:10.1177/00207152241295976

Housing unaffordability and political preferences among young people in Europe

2025· article· en· W4406052083 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julia Furtado de Barros, Lindsay B. Flynn

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds National de la Recherche Luxembourg
KeywordsPoliticsEnvironmental healthBusinessPolitical scienceMedicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Affordable housing is a pressing political problem that seems to be fueling social unrest among young people. Rising rents, expensive property prices, and stagnant wages leave young adults with few prospects of entering the housing market without intergenerational financial support. In this article, we examine the role of homeownership, housing unaffordability, and intergenerational transfers in explaining welfare preference and voting behavior of young European adults. We propose the emergence of a new growing interest group composed of financially overburdened young renters and mortgaged homeowners whose welfare is increasingly threatened. We bridged HFCS 2017 and ISSP 2016 datasets through statistical matching and used ordered and multinomial logit models to analyze these trends in Belgium, Germany, France, and Slovakia. We find that homeownership polarizes young adults in terms of their welfare support. Housing unaffordability, however, coalesces young homeowners and renters by increasing redistribution support.

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)0.003
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207