Globalization and Income Inequality in G7: A Bootstrap Panel Granger Causality Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this research, the relationship between income inequality and the KOF index of globalization is determined using panel data covering G7 countries 1970-2010. This study applying Kónya (2006)’s bootstrap panel Granger causality test, which takes into account cross-sectional dependence and slope heterogeneity simultaneously, analyzes the impact of globalization on income inequality in terms of economic, social, political and overall dimensions among examined countries. Empirical results indicate one-way causality from economic globalization to income inequality in Canada and France, two-way causality between economic globalization to income inequality in only the UK; one-way causality from social globalization to income inequality in France and the UK; one-way causality from political globalization to income inequality in only France. When analyzing the causality between the aggregate globalization and income inequality, it is observed that overall globalization positively causes income inequality in Canada and the UK and negatively in France, while in the case of Germany, Italy, Japan and the USA there is no empirical evidence of causality between globalization indices and income inequality in either direction.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".