MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3161838289

An Empirical Evaluation of the Effect of Covid-19 Travel Restrictions on Canadians' Cross Border Travel and Canadian Retailers

2021· preprint· en· W3161838289 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jen Baggs, Loretta Fung, Beverly Lapham

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueCounterfactual thinkingBorder crossingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Demographic economicsGeographyEconomic impact analysisBusinessKilometerDistance decayEconomicsEconomic geographyImmigrationFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper estimates the impact on Canadian retailers' revenues of significantly decreased international travel by Canadians in response to the Covid-19 related travel restrictions imposed on the US-Canada border. We use detailed data from 1991 to 2020 on Canadians' travel to the United States to estimate the monthly fraction of a community's residents who cross the border for 237 communities within 150 kilometers of the border. We estimate the model of cross-border travel from Baggs, Fung and Lapham (2018) and use those estimates to establish community-level counterfactual crossing rates had the pandemic not occurred. We then combine those rates with actual crossing rates to estimate the revenue losses that small Canadian retailers' avoided due to the near cessation of cross-border travel by Canadians as a result of the pandemic. Our results suggest that, on average, the border closure prevented a 1.7% decrease in revenues for a small Canadian retailer located within 150 kilometers of the border. However, we document considerable variation in the magnitude of this decrease across communities and retail sectors, with estimates ranging from approximately 0% to 234%. Specifically, retailers that are located in less affluent communities near sizeable US shopping opportunities and that are in sub-sectors that cater to travelers experienced the largest foregone revenue losses due to border closures in 2020.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.377 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicUrban Transport and Accessibility→French-language works237,207→