Trade Liberalisation and Labour Market Adjustment in Botswana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We study the effects of domestic trade liberalisation on labour markets in Botswana. South Africa is the dominant member of the Southern Africa Customs Union. As such, when South Africa liberalised trade in the 1990s, this induced large and plausibly exogenous tariff reductions for the other customs union members, including Botswana. Using labour force surveys from Botswana spanning a decade, we find that trade liberalisation did not affect the relative size of industries in terms of employment. However, trade liberalisation had effects within industries. We find an increase in the prevalence of working in an informal firm and self-employment, but mixed evidence of effects on unemployment. Hours worked decreased in response to trade liberalisation, partially driven by the movement of workers to informal firms. Despite large increases in aggregate income, trade liberalisation is associated with a reduction in monthly income, but the results are imprecise. Our results also suggest that a positive export demand shock, the 2000 African Growth and Opportunities Act, is associated with a reduction in employment in informal firms in the clothing industry.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".