MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1582699376

Working Paper 106 - Does Human Capital Protect Workers against Exogenous Shocks? South Africa in the 2008 - 2009 Crisis

2010· preprint· en· W1582699376 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ron Leung, Marco Stampini, Désiré Vencatachellum

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2010
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecessionTollFinancial crisisShock (circulatory)EconomicsHuman capitalReal economyQuarter (Canadian coin)Great recessionLabour economicsMonetary economicsMarket economyMacroeconomicsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The financial and economic crisis of 2008and 2009 has taken its toll on the SouthAfrican economy. The economy contractedfor the first time since 1998, and enteredrecession during the fourth quarter of 2008.The GDP contraction was soon transmittedto the labor market. Between the secondquarters of 2008 and 2009, employment fellby 3.8 percent. However, not all individualswere hit with the same intensity. Using laborforce survey data unique in the Africancontext, we find that human capital provideda buffer against the shock. After controllingfor observable characteristics, education andexperience showed the potential to entirelyoffset the effect of the recession on thelikelihood of employment. This has importantpolicy implications, as it strengthens thecase for strategic investments in humancapital, and helps identifying the unskilled asthose with the highest need for social safetynet interventions during the recession.

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)0.006
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207