Effective Tool or Effectively Hollow?: Balanced Budget Legislation in Western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two decades have passed since the first wave of balanced budget legislation (BBL) in Canada. This passage of time and the recent economic downturn afford researchers the opportunity to evaluate the success of these regulations in encouraging fiscal responsibility. This paper provides both a quantitative analysis of the impact of BBL on expenditure growth and a qualitative assessment of BBL in Western Canada as these four western provinces confronted the Great Recession of 2008–09. On both accounts, our analysis suggests that BBL did not fare particularly well in terms of its original objectives. Our empirical analysis shows that BBL had no discernible effect in restraining expenditure growth relative to revenue growth in most provinces, leaving them in a vulnerable fiscal position to avert deficits during economic recession. We illustrate this vulnerability among Western Canadian governments when confronted with the Great Recession. In other words, BBL was neither strong enough to limit expenditure growth during the good times nor adequate to prevent governments from choosing to run deficits during the bad times. Our analysis suggests that, like any piece of legislation, BBL is only as effective as the political will and public support surrounding it.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".