MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3055273122 · doi:10.1111/jcms.13097

Macroprudential Policy on an Uneven Playing Field: Supranational Regulation and Domestic Politics in the EU's Dependent Market Economies

2020· article· en· W3055273122 on OpenAlexaff
Dóra Piroska, Yuliya Gorelkina, Juliet Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueJCMS Journal of Common Market Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuropean unionFinancial crisisGlobalizationPoliticsFinancial marketFinancial regulationEconomic systemEconomyInternational economicsEconomicsEconomic policyBusinessPolitical scienceFinancial systemMarket economyFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Central bankers and financial regulators in East Central Europe and the Balkans regularly employed macroprudential policy before the global financial crisis and continue to be among its most active proponents in the European Union. We draw upon the Dependent Market Economy framework to explore how the EU's five DMEs – the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia – have used macroprudential policy to manage the uneven distributional effects of financial globalization and European integration. We contend that while structural and EU‐specific institutional factors define the available policy space, policy choices within that space depend upon how domestic actors translate macroprudential policies into their local contexts. Overall, our analysis highlights the social impact and challenges to European integration of heavy DME reliance on macroprudential policy making, especially when motivated by domestic financial nationalism.

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)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.015
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCMS Journal of Common Market StudiesSame topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207