MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2434376370

L’impact des services de garde à contribution réduite du Québec sur le taux d’activité féminin, le revenu intérieur et les budgets gouvernementaux = Impact of Quebec’s universal low fee childcare program on female labour force participation, domestic income, and government budgets

2012· article· fr· W2434376370 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pierre Fortin, Luc Godbout, Suzie St‐Cerny

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge UdeS (Institutional Deposit of the University of Sherbrooke) · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé: Nous estimons qu’en 2008 la disponibilité de services de garde à contribution réduite au Québec a incité près de 70 000 mères de plus à détenir un emploi qu’en l’absence d’un tel programme. Sur cette base, nous calculons que le revenu intérieur (PIB) du Québec a été majoré de 5 G$. Nous procédons ensuite à une simulation de la rétroaction favorable sur les revenus autonomes perçus et les prestations versées par le gouvernement fédéral et celui du Québec. Nous en concluons que, du point de vue budgétaire, le programme des services de garde à contribution réduite est financièrement rentable pour ces deux gouvernements.||Abstract: Based on earlier studies, we estimate that in 2008 universal access to low-fee childcare in Quebec induced nearly 70,000 more mothers to hold jobs than if no such program had existed - an increase of 3.8% in women employment. By our calculation, Quebec’s domestic income (GDP) was higher by about 1.7% ($5 billion) as a result. We run a simulation of the impact of the childcare program on government own-source revenues and family transfers. We find that the tax-transfer return the federal and Quebec governments get from the program significantly exceeds its cost.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.256
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge UdeS (Institutional Deposit of the University of Sherbrooke)Same topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207