Macro and financial-sector policies to sustain the recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada benefited from many strengths such as a less-leveraged financial sector, few subprime mortgages and sound corporate balance sheets as it weathered the global economic crisis of 2007-09. Actions by the monetary and fiscal authorities have stabilised financial markets and provided substantial support to the economy. With upturns in global trade and in commodity prices, the recovery is now well under way, but the pace of expansion is projected to slow later in 2010 and in 2011 as policy stimulus is withdrawn, inventory rebuilding runs its course and households reduce their spending growth in reaction to high indebtedness. In the longer term, Canada faces the same reform challenges that other OECD countries face to allow credible exit paths for big banks and to increase competition, contestability and shareholder oversight in this sector. International efforts to strengthen financial-system resilience should take inspiration from Canada’s own model of risk-based prudential regulation, which successfully held banking risks in check. Reforms that imply large increases in bank capital should be accompanied by greater market discipline to contain moral hazard and spur efficiency. Securities markets should be better regulated in order to attract foreign capital, encourage competitive impulses and improve macro-prudential regulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".