MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592630418 · doi:10.1111/rode.12764

Labor policy and multinational firms: The “race to the bottom” revisited

2021· article· en· W2592630418 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

VenueReview of Development Economics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationEconomicsRace to the bottomImperfectRace (biology)Labour economicsBenchmark (surveying)Production (economics)Function (biology)MicroeconomicsSet (abstract data type)Incentive

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper revisits the “race to the bottom” phenomenon in a simple game theoretic framework. We consider one multinational firm, which requires two inputs that are imperfect substitutes, and two countries. In the benchmark model the labor of each country specializes in a distinct input. Seeking to maximize their labor incomes, countries simultaneously announce wages after which the firm chooses its labor employment in each country. We show that “race to the bottom” (countries setting minimum possible wages) is never an equilibrium. Moreover there are equilibria with “race to the top,” that is, countries set maximum possible wages. This result is robust in an extended model where prior to competing in wages, each country can make input‐specific investments to make its labor available for one or both inputs. Provided the production function of the firm is not asymmetrically intensive in either one of the two inputs, there are equilibria of the extended game with specialization (i.e., countries invest in distinct inputs) as well as “race to the top.”

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.208 · 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