Fiscal resilience of Russia's regions in the face of COVID-19
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of the study was to analyze how COVID-19 pandemic affects regional budgets and regional fiscal resilience in Russia. Design/methodology/approach The research article is structured as follows. Based on the official data from the Ministry of Finance, the Federal Treasure and the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation, first, the state of Russian regional budgets before and under COVID-19 is analyzed. Second, due to the increase of regional spending commitments under pandemic the regional debt dependence is reviewed. Third, anticrisis fiscal measures which have been taken to combat the negative impact of COVID-19 are discussed. Findings In general, 2020 may be the most difficult for regional budgets, although the results of the first quarter do not show such tension. However, the impact of COVID-19 on budget indicators is ambiguous because the economic crisis of 2020 is dual, including the crisis in the oil markets. The pandemic has become a unique global phenomenon, the effect of which is difficult to identify and interpret outside of the economic aspects of life. Originality/value The value of the article is based on the overview of the state of regional budgets before and under COVID-19, on the analysis of how pandemic affects fiscal resilience of the regional budgets and on the forecast of how serious the volume of lost revenues are going to be.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it