MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625250072 · doi:10.1111/twec.12781

Labour market characteristics and surviving import shocks

2019· article· en· W2625250072 on OpenAlexaff
Jeff Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Economy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShock (circulatory)EconomicsEmployment protection legislationChinaCompetition (biology)ExploitLegislationIndex (typography)Labour economicsInternational economicsMacroeconomicsUnemployment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper investigates whether different labour market characteristics amplify or dampen the local labour market impacts from Chinese import competition exposure. I exploit state‐level variation in initial, pre‐shock labour market characteristics and regional variation across local labour markets in exposure to Chinese imports for identification. I find that local labour markets in states with higher union density experience more severe adverse consequences as a result of increased import exposure. Conversely, higher initial minimum wages help mute the negative impacts of the China shock. I also provide some evidence that exceptions to employment‐at‐will legislation can affect employment responses to increased Chinese imports. Finally, examining all policies together in an index, I show that higher levels of policies intended to benefit and protect workers can actually magnify the extent of the damage inflicted by import competition. My results suggest that initial labour market characteristics and policies can play an important role in understanding why local labour markets react differently to trade shocks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld EconomySame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207