Self‐employment dynamics and self‐employment trends: a study of Canadian men and women, 1982–1998
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self‐employment has risen dramatically in Canada, accounting for a disproportionate share of job growth since the 1980s. Using hitherto unexploited information on labour force transitions from sixteen waves of the Survey of Consumer Finances between 1982 and 1998, we show that the changes in transition patterns underlying these increases were very different for women and men. For women, most of the increase in self‐employment is attributable to an increase in retention rates in self‐employment. For men, most is attributable to a decrease in the stability of paid employment. Self‐employment thus rose both in secularly improving (women's) and deteriorating (men's) labour markets. JEL Classification: J23, J63 Dynamique et tendances du travail autonome: une étude des hommes et des femmes au Canada, 1982–1998. Le travail autonome a augmenté dramatiquement au Canada et a été une source relativement importante de la croissance des emplois dans les années 1980. En utilisant des données qu'on n'avait pas utilisées auparavant sur seize transitions dans l'expérience de travail (données obtenues par les Enquêtes sur les finances des consommateurs entre 1982 et 1998), les auteurs montrent que les changements dans les patterns de transition qui soustendent cet accroissement dans le travail autonome sont très différents pour les hommes et les femmes. Pour les femmes, le gros de l'accroissement est attribuable à un accroissement du taux de rétention d'emploi dans le travail autonome. Pour les hommes, le gros de l'accroissement est attribuable à un déclin dans la stabilité de l'emploi rémunéré. Le travail autonome croît donc à la fois dans les secteurs où le marché du travail a le vent dans les voiles (pour les femmes) et dans ceux où le marché du travail se détériore (pour les hommes).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".