MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894676390 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2018-080

Tariffs and the Composition of Employment: Evidence from the Canada–US Free Trade Agreement

2019· article· en· W2894676390 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jeff Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTariffOpenness to experienceCensusImmigrationFree trade agreementFree tradeEconomicsDemographic economicsInternational economicsComposition (language)Affect (linguistics)Labour economicsGeographyDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I analyze the effect of the Canada–US Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA) on the composition of employment at the local labour market level in Canada. I construct local labour-market-level changes in tariffs for both exports and imports, exploiting regional differences in pre-CUSFTA industrial composition to obtain variation in the degree to which CUSFTA affected localities across Canada. I find that Census Divisions (CDs) that experienced larger Canadian tariff cuts against US imports experienced higher rates of self-employment. CDs with larger American tariff cuts against Canadian goods correspondingly experienced lower rates of self-employment. These self-employment effects are dampened in CDs with higher initial shares of educated people, immigrants, and female workers. I do not find any evidence that part-time employment is affected by CUSFTA tariff cuts. The findings in this article provide evidence that increasing trade openness between two developed countries can affect the prevalence of self-employment.

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)0.007
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.150 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207