MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281859240 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.170333

The Impact of Fiscal Rules on the Fiscal Deficit for Ten Countries of the European Union -Empirical Analysis for the Period 1995-2020

2022· article· en· W4281859240 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Driton Qehaja, Genc Zhushi, Agon Salihu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policies and Political Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsFiscal unionFiscal policyDeficit spendingDebtPanel dataGovernment debtMacroeconomicsFiscal adjustmentFiscal imbalanceEuropean unionEconometric modelGovernment spendingFiscal deficitFiscal federalismFiscal sustainabilityPublic financeGovernment (linguistics)Monetary economicsEconomic policyEconometricsWelfare

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper analyzes whether fiscal rules impact improved budget performance and fiscal discipline in the ten EU nations with the largest average fiscal deficit from 1995 to 2020. Fiscal performance will be reflected through the fiscal deficit adjusted for cyclical economic periods. The independent variables are real long-term interest rates, fiscal rules, public debt (expressed as a percentage of GDP), government effectiveness, and government spending (expressed as a percentage of GDP). The methodology used consists of empirical panel data through the OLS econometric model. With this model we have analyzed the responsiveness of the fiscal deficit, which have applied fiscal rules, by incorporating in the model other factors as well. The empirical results shows that fiscal rules, public debt, government effectiveness, and government spending statistically significantly impact the fiscal deficit. At the same time, the real long-term interest rate did not reach the level of statistical significance based on the model results.

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)0.000
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 score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicFiscal Policies and Political EconomyFrench-language works237,207