MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7136325748 · doi:10.52174/2579-2989_2025.3-15

Socio-Economic Challenges of Population Aging and Opportunities for Social Entrepreneurship

2025· article· W7136325748 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tereza SHAHRIMANYAN

Bibliographic record

VenueAmberd Bulletin · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSkoll Foundation
KeywordsWorkforceAging in the American workforcePopulation ageingSocial entrepreneurshipEntrepreneurshipPopulationWorkforce developmentEmerging markets

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aging of the workforce poses significant challenges for the economy, while social entrepreneurship can become a solution. It creates new opportunities for the elderly, ensures their active participation, and strengthens community ties. As a result of demographic changes, in many countries the potential of the retired workforce is once again becoming an important direction of economic and social policy. A global trend is emerging in which retired workers are re-engaged in the labor market through social entrepreneurship. This approach simultaneously addresses two issues: it ensures the social inclusion of the elderly and mitigates the consequences of labor shortages. Social entrepreneurship is considered an effective tool because it combines social mission with economic sustainability. It creates opportunities through which accumulated experience and knowledge are transformed into new value for the labor market, communities, and younger generations. Thanks to this new global trend, individuals excluded from the labor market become drivers of change, while also helping to alleviate emerging professional shortages. This trend is reflected in various initiatives—from “second careers” promoted by Encore.org in the United States, to Mirthy’s digital platform in the United Kingdom, and Seniorpreneurs programs in Canada and Australia.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmberd BulletinSame topicMigration, Aging, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207