The incidence and persistence of cyclical job loss in New Zealand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In New Zealand, the impact of the 20072008 Global Financial Crisis (GFC) was milder than in most other developed countries, though still substantial, with employment declining by 2.5 percent between the fourth quarter of 2008 and the fourth quarter of 2009. There were pronounced declines in job and worker turnover rates, signalling a decline in labour market liquidity and difficulties for new entrants and high-turnover groups of workers (Fabling and Maré, 2012). The current paper documents the extent and composition of employment change between 2000 and 2011, focusing particularly on the 20082010 period, when the labour market impacts of the GFC were strongest. As in previous downturns, the incidence of cyclical job loss and unemployment has fallen disproportionately on young and unskilled workers. The paper identifies, for subgroups of workers identified by age, gender and earnings level, the sensitivity of employment growth and labour market flows to aggregate employment fluctuations and also to relative fluctuations across industries and local labour market areas. The rate of job accessions (hiring) is particularly sensitive to the economic cycle and most strongly for young workers. Most of the differences across groups in the size of cyclical employment fluctuations are due to differing responsiveness to common shocks and not to exposure to different industry and local shocks. Finally, the paper traces outcomes for workers whose jobs end, summarising their duration out of work and the wage increases or reductions they experience when they secure employment. Workers who left or lost jobs spent longer out of work after the GFC and settled for lower earnings growth when they did find a job. Both of these effects had partly but not fully abated within 3 years of the onset of the GFC.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".