MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307122350 · doi:10.1002/ijfe.2715

The oil price plummeted in 2014–2015: Is there an effect on Chinese firms' labour investment?

2022· article· en· W4307122350 on OpenAlexaff
Xinheng Liu, Shuxian Li, Chengbo Fu, Xu Gong, Chen Fan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Finance & Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOil priceEconomicsInvestment (military)ChinaCompetition (biology)Government (linguistics)Monetary economicsLabour economicsPetroleum industryMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using the exogenous event of oil price sharp decline in 2014–2015, this paper employs the difference‐in‐difference method to establish a causal link between the oil price decline and the Chinese firms' labour investment. Data of listed companies in China from 2012 to 2016 are used to explore this relationship. We show that the employment for firms in industries with significant negative oil price risk exposure increases 16.4% after the oil price plummeted, that is, the oil price decline significantly promotes the firms' labour force. Additionally, the positive effect of oil price decline on the firms' labour force is more pronounced in firms with higher risk‐taking, financing constraints, and industry competition. Lastly, we also document that the effect of oil price decline is through sales growth channels to increase labour demand. However, firms tend to overinvest in labour after the oil price plummeted. Based on these findings we suggest that oil price fluctuation should be an important factor for the Chinese government and enterprises when they make an economic decision related to the labour force.

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 score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Finance & EconomicsSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207