MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297445650 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v14n10p23

The Influence of Mayors’ Characteristics and Elections on the Composition of Brazilian Municipalities’ Expenditures

2022· article· en· W4297445650 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jonatan Lautenschlage

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policies and Political Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyRecreationSocioeconomic statusLocal electionLocal governmentPoliticsComposition (language)Government (linguistics)Demographic economicsEconomicsPolitical sciencePublic administrationSociologyDemographyPopulationLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper disentangles the main factors conditioning the levels and composition of public expenditures on a large panel of Brazilian municipalities. Using the IMF’s classification of expense by functions of government, it is possible to analyze how personal characteristics of Brazilian mayors influence the fiscal policy. Empirical results suggest that expenditures increase during the year before election years. During local election years, there is no evidence of an opportunistic manipulation of expenditure composition. However, in the year before local election, mayors favor items highly visible and appreciated by the electorate, such as housing and community amenities, and recreation, culture, and religion. Political alignment with matters both for the level and weights of expenditures by function. Mayors’ ideology is associated with lower weight of recreation, culture, and religion. Ideology, gender, university education and party similarity with higher levels of government are relevant at local election years. We also find demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of municipalities influence the level of expenditures.

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)0.010
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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicFiscal Policies and Political EconomyFrench-language works237,207