MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109823336 · doi:10.1111/caje.12546

The heterogeneous effects of COVID‐19 on Canadian household consumption, debt and savings

2022· article· en· W3109823336 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
James MacGee, Thomas Michael Pugh, Kurt See

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsUnemploymentConsumption (sociology)Household debtDebtDemographic economicsLabour economicsYield (engineering)Precautionary savingsHousehold incomeSurvey data collectionConsumer Expenditure SurveyDemographicsAutonomous consumptionIncome distributionDistribution (mathematics)Monetary economicsInequalityMarket liquidityMacroeconomicsAggregate expenditure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops an agent-based model to quantify the impact of COVID-19 on household debt and savings. To build a representative cross-section of households that vary by income, debt portfolios and consumption baskets, we merge data from the Survey of Household Spending and the Survey of Financial Security. We construct paths for consumption and employment over the crisis, accounting for heterogeneous risk of unemployment across demographics, government transfers, and substitution between expenditure categories that vary in contact intensity. Our model simulations yield a heterogeneous effect of COVID-19 across the income distribution. Low-income households face the highest risk of unemployment, but transfers provide generous income replacement. Middle-income job losers see the fastest rise in debt because transfers only partially replace lost income. Most unplanned savings are accumulated by high-income households that face lower risk of unemployment and larger declines in hard-to-distance spending. We find the rise in savings could generate a brief jump of nearly 6% of monthly consumption.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.107 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économiqueSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207