Un cuarto de siglo de modelos de financiación autonómica. Análisis de los resultados distributivos del sistema/A Quarter Century of Models of Regional Financing in Spain. An Analysis of Distributional Results of the System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este trabajo tiene como objetivo medir y evaluar el efecto redistributivo de las transferencias y la distribucion de los recursos financieros entre las CC.AA. de regimen comun para los distintos modelos de financiacion autonomica, desde 1987 a 2010. Para el analisis utilizamos indicadores de desigualdad basados en indices de concentracion, ya que los mismos nos permiten medir el efecto redistributivo, la progresividad y la reordenacion con la misma tipologia de indicadores. Los resultados ponen de manifiesto que el sistema ha evolucionado claramente hacia un menor efecto redistributivo de las transferencias en las CC.AA. del 151, que las CC.AA del 143 han convergido hacia los resultados distributivos de las CC.AA del 151 y que las transferencias han ido reduciendo su efecto sobre la progresividad y la reordenacion. This paper aims to measure and evaluate the redistributive effect of transfers and distribution of financial resources between common regime Spanish Autonomous Communities (ACs) for different models of regional funding, from 1987 to 2010. The analysis relies on inequality indicators based on concentration indices, which allow to measure the redistributive effect, the progressivity and the reranking on the same type of indicators. Results show that (a) the system has clearly evolved towards less redistributive effect of the transfers in the ACs of art.151, (b) the ACs of Art.143 have converged towards the distributional outcomes of the ACs of Art.151, and (c) transfers' effect on progressivity and reranking has been diminishing along time.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".