Accounting for the Rise in Consumer Bankruptcies in the U.S. and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personal bankruptcy filings have increased dramatically: rising from 1.4 in per thousand of working age population 1970 to 8.5 in 2002 in the United States and from 0.2 in 1970 to 4.3 in 2002 in Canada. This paper asks whether 6 commonly mentioned potential explanations -- financial innovation, financial market liberalization, an increase in household specific idiosyncratic risk, demographic changes, legal changes and decreased “stigma†-- can quantitatively account for the rise in consumer bankruptcies in the United States and Canada. We use a heterogeneous agent life cycle model with competitive intermediaries who are able to (imperfectly) observe households (labor) productivity, age and current asset holdings. We undertake numerical experiments to determine the extent to which each of the 5 factors can account for the rise in consumer bankruptcies. Our analysis suggests that financial innovation (the spread of credit scoring and new collateralized debt instruments) and financial liberalization play an essential role, while demographic changes and increased earnings uncertainty play a small role in accounting for the rise. These results cast doubt on explanations of the rise which depend upon declining ``stigma'' explanation or the relaxation of the bankruptcy code
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".