3.8 Article

Measuring active ageing within the European Union: implications on economic development

出版社

INST ECONOMIC RESEARCH-POLAND
DOI: 10.24136/eq.2019.028

关键词

Active Ageing Index; European Union; economic development; labour market; macro-econometric modelling

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research background: The ageing phenomenon undermines the stability and equilibrium of the labour market and it affects the economic development of countries, as well as the welfare of older people aged over 65 years. Purpose of the article: Against this background, our research is conducted to assess the specific ways in which active ageing (measured through the active ageing index - AAI). correlated with other economic and labour market credentials, would impact the economic development of EU Member States. Methods: The research methodology consists of two econometric procedures, namely (i) cluster analysis performed on EU-28 countries to configure congruent groups according to similar features of the active ageing (measured through the Active Ageing Index - AAI) and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) levels, respectively (ii) panel data analysis, applied distinctly on two panels, EU-15 (old) and EU-13 (new), relying on four macro-econometric models (robust regression, panel corrected standard errors, spatial lag and spatial error). in order to test the direct influences of AAI and other economic and social selected variables on economic development. The analysis is made for the 2010-2018 lapse of time, by capturing all the available data for the AAI as reported by the European Commission. Findings & Value added: The' results Highlight import dissimilarities between the EU countries that require a rethinking of policies for the active ageing population support. Thereby, constant policy rethinking, adequate strategies, measures and tools for the active ageing population support become outlier keystones that entail a successful integration of the older people within all life dimensions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据