MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3122773775 · doi:10.34989/swp-2005-14

Labour Market Adjustments to Exchange Rate Fluctuations: Evidence from Canadian Manufacturing Industries

2021· preprint· en· W3122773775 on OpenAlexaffabout
Danny Leung, Terence Yuen

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepreciation (economics)EndogeneityEconomicsLiberian dollarExchange rateLabour economicsManufacturingEmpirical evidenceMonetary economicsBusinessEconometricsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors provide some of the first empirical evidence on labour market adjustments to exchange rate movements in Canadian manufacturing industries. Generalized method of moments estimates that control for endogeneity show that there are significant changes in labour input when a change in the exchange rate occurs. During the 1981-97 period, the cumulative effect of a 10 per cent depreciation (appreciation) of the Canadian dollar was a 10 to 12.5 per cent increase (decline) in labour input. The majority of this effect was due to the increase (decrease) in the demand for domestically produced goods both at home and abroad when a depreciation (appreciation) occurs. The authors find evidence that the responsiveness of labour input to exchange rate movements was greater in the 1990s than in the 1980s. They also find that industries with high and medium net trade exposures adjust their labour inputs more than industries with low trade exposures. The exchange rate effect on real wages is estimated to be virtually zero for all manufacturing industries.

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 score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→