MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Tariff reduction and employment in Canadian manufacturing

2007· article· en· W1506410037 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sebastien Larochelle-Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTariffLeverage (statistics)ProductivityWorkforceLabour economicsDebtBusinessInternational economicsEconomicsMonetary economicsFinanceMacroeconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. This paper uses firm‐level tax data to investigate whether the link between tariff changes and manufacturing employment differed across firms with various productivity and leverage characteristics over the period 1988–94. The results suggest that the effect of domestic tariff reductions on employment was typically small, but that losses were significantly larger for less productive firms. For instance, firms with average productivity in 1988 responded to domestic tariff changes by cutting employment by 11.3% over the period 1988–94, while lower‐productivity firms typically shed 20.8% of their workforce over the same period. This paper also indicates that firms with unhealthy balance sheets – those with relatively too much equity or too much leverage – downsized more in the face of declining domestic tariffs, suggesting that financial constraints became more binding when tariff cuts were implemented. These results suggest that firms with high productivity and better financial health were better positioned to face the challenge of trade liberalization.

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)0.000
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.012 · 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→