Les déterminants du travail autonome au Québec et au Canada (1993-2010)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studies the determinants of self-employment in Québec and in the rest of Canada by focusing on liquidity constraints, age and aggregate unemployment. We use a random effects probit model to analyse panel data from the Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics (SLID) for the period 1993-2010. The main results are as follows. The positive effect of investment income on the probability of being self-employed confirms the existence of liquidity constraints. Being older increases the probability of choosing self-employment, rather than salaried work. This suggests that working for oneself may be a stepping stone towards retirement. High unemployment decreases the probability of being self-employed, suggesting that pull factors dominate push factors. Résumé – Cet article analyse les déterminants du travail autonome au Québec et dans le reste du Canada en se concentrant sur les contraintes de liquidité, l’âge et le chômage agrégé. Nous utilisons les données en panel de l’Enquête sur la dynamique du travail et du revenu (EDTR) couvrant la période 1993-2010. Les résultats principaux tirés du modèle avec effets aléatoires sont les suivants : l’effet positif des revenus de placement sur la probabilité d’être travailleur autonome confirme la présence de contraintes financières; être plus âgé accroît la probabilité de choisir le travail autonome, suggérant que ce type d’emploi peut être un tremplin vers la retraite; un chômage élevé diminue la probabilité d’être à son compte ce qui suggère que les facteurs de pull dominent sur les facteurs de push.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".