MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979534757 · doi:10.3386/w26342

The Transformation and Performance of Emerging Market Economies Across the Great Divide of the Global Financial Crisis

2019· report· en· W2979534757 on OpenAlexaff
Michael D. Bordo, Pierre L. Siklos

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2019
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial crisisEmerging marketsBusinessFinancial systemFinancial marketTransformation (genetics)EconomicsEconomyFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The process of central bank (CB) evolution by emerging market economies (EMEs), including central bank independence (CBI) and transparency (CBT), converged towards that of the advanced economies (AEs) before the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) of 2007-2008.It was greatly aided by the adoption of inflation targeting.In this paper we evaluate this convergence process for a representative set of EMEs and AEs since the disruption of the GFC.We use several measures of institutional development (changes in CBI, changes in CBT, changes in a new index of institutional resilience and changes in a new measure of CB credibility).We then use panel VARs based on both factor models and observed data to ascertain the impact of global shocks, financial shocks, trade shocks and credibility shocks on the EMEs versus the AEs.We find that although some EMEs did maintain the levels of CBI and CBT that they had before the crisis, on average they experienced a decline in institutional resilience to shocks and in the quality of their governance.Moreover it appears that CB credibility in EMEs was more fragile than was the case for the AEs in the face of the global shocks (from the US) than was the case for the AEs.

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)0.006
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207