The Contested Terrain of Central Banking: Ideas, Interests and the Bank of Canada’s Inflation-Rate Reduction Policies, 1975-1991
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monetary policy in Canada underwent significant changes between 1975 and 1991 as the central bank shifted from fostering full employment to aggressively reducing and controlling inflation. Existing studies of this period largely adopt either monetarist or constructivist frameworks of analysis. Both of these approaches do not sufficiently account for the class-based dynamics of monetary policy. Adopting Epstein’s view that central banks are contested terrains in which conflicting interests compete for profit and power over the marcroeconomy (2001), this paper examines the class-based dimensions of monetary policy change. The framework developed in this study accounts for both systemic factors of capital accumulation and class dynamics that influence monetary policy. Three distinct yet overlapping periods are analysed: the monetarist period (1975-82); the Volcker Shock period (1977-84); and the Crow Doctrine period (1988-91). Each of these periods had a distinct configuration of class forces, and these shifting configurations influenced the monetary ideas and policies that prevailed during a given time. Organized labour was significantly weakened during the monetarist and Volcker periods, while finance capital grew in power and influence over the macroeconomy into the 1990s.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".