New Evidence on the Canada-U.S. ICT Investment Gap, 1976-2014 Selected OECD Countries, 1986-2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Productivity growth results in part from investment in information and communications technologies (ICT). To better understand Canada’s poor productivity growth relative to the United States since 2000, this report provides a detailed examination of ICT investment trends in the two countries. The report finds that real ICT investment in the total economy in Canada has yet to recover from the 2008-2009 recession, while it has not suffered the same fate south of the border. Between 2008 and 2014 real ICT investment in Canada fell 1.0 per cent per year, compared to a 2.9 per cent per year increase in the United States. The gap was even greater for real ICT investment per job, down 1.8 per cent per year in Canada versus a 2.8 per cent annual increase in the United States. The weaker ICT investment growth in Canada resulted in a large increase in the Canada-US ICT investment gap from 31.6 percentage points to 43.7 points, as nominal ICT investment per job fell from 68.4 per cent of the US level in 2008, the highest value ever achieved, to 56.3 per cent in 2014.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".