MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2214972767 · doi:10.1093/jeg/lbw006

International trade and local labor markets: Do foreign and domestic shocks affect regions differently?

2016· article· en· W2214972767 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Economic Geography · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economics and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsWageInternational economicsInternational tradeLabour economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the attention given to international trade in discussion of the economic struggles of many US regions, it is unclear whether international trade shocks impact local economies more, or differently, than shocks originating within the domestic economy. A challenge in making this discernment is separating trade shocks from common or domestic shocks. Therefore, using US county-level data for 1990–2010, this study carefully constructs shocks to local economies, isolating those arising from international imports and exports to assess whether trade shocks have different effects from domestic shocks. In confirmatory analysis, we also employ a novel combination of IV and matching strategies. We examine a variety of indicators including employment growth, population growth, employment rates, wage rates and poverty rates. The results suggest that international trade shocks have some different effects than overall domestic shocks, though likely less than commonly perceived. We also find that domestic shocks dominate international trade shocks in explaining variation in regional labor market outcomes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it