MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184350697 · doi:10.7202/1079131ar

Employment in Ontario’s Industrial Heartland: Evidence of Economic Decline in a Mid-Sized Industrial City

2021· article· en· W3184350697 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Don Kerr, Komin Qiyomiddin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Regional Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional resilience and development
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaRestructuringGlobalizationOutsourcingCensusEconomic restructuringJob lossManufacturingEconomic geographyEconomyEconomic growthEconomicsBusinessGeographyUnemploymentSociologyPopulationMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the “second wave” of globalization commenced in the late 1970s and early 1980s, countries around the world underwent economic restructuring. Canada, as one of the nodes in an integrated global economy, was no exception. In particular, the province of Ontario, which was and still is the biggest manufacturing hub in Canada, experienced a decline in terms of manufacturing employment. Inevitably, for London, a mid-sized industrial city located in Southwestern Ontario, this transition had major implications, a reality that it shared with several other cities in the southwest. As closely integrated with the broader North American economy, London’s loss of jobs due to outsourcing and other technological and global forces was certainly not unique. Yet as demonstrated in this paper, London’s labour market has performed particularly poorly since 2001 relative to most other census metropolitan areas (CMAs) across Ontario, or for that matter, across Canada. This is true in terms of overall levels of job creation, as well as growth in the types of jobs that are generally considered desirable in the 21 st century, i.e. jobs in higher skilled occupational categories.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.088 · 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.

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Regional ScienceSame topicRegional resilience and developmentFrench-language works237,207