Could the Recession have Been Shortened in Romania after the 2009 Crisis? A Short Answer Given by Fiscal Multipliers during Recessions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The experience of the large fiscal adjustments shows their efficiency depends mainly on how much is to be adjusted, the factors that contributed to the fiscal disequilibrium and their structure (discretionary or imposed by the economic environment), the size and the quality of the adjustment measures and the pace of reaction of the fiscal authorities. In this paper we analyze the size of the fiscal adjustment of the Romanian economy during the recession of 2009-2012 relatively to previous large fiscal adjustments in the European Union before the Great Recession. We determine if the measures that were taken in Romania were properly sized by using a simple method for determining the fiscal multipliers for the Romanian economy, based on recent findings of the international literature. Our findings show that the fiscal adjustment made in Romania between 2009-2012 was the fastest in the European Union with the highest yearly pace (we use as reference the adjustments prior to the Great Recession) and that the Romanian recession could have been shortened by at least one year. Our findings provide an argument that the austerity measures might cure an economy but if their size is improper, it might lower their long term potential.</p>
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".