MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396890238 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17050206

Impact of COVID-19 Travel Subsidies on Stock Market Returns: Evidence from Japanese Tourism Companies

2024· article· en· W4396890238 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hideaki Sakawa, Naoki Watanabel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNomura FoundationNagoya City University
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)TourismSubsidyBusinessStock (firearms)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakStock marketSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Financial economicsEconomicsGeographyMarket economyVirologyOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines stock market response (SMR) to the Japanese tourism industry (TI) after the government’s announcement of travel subsidies (TRSs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, using a sample comprising 80 listed Japanese firms in the TI and an event study method (ESM) to determine the impact of government policy responses (GPRs) to the pandemic. This study found that investors in the TI reacted positively to the announcement of subsidies; this positive effect persisted for 50 trading days after the announcement but was weaker for transportation firms. The results suggest that TRSs are important for the TI, with a stronger link to travel-related firms, such as airlines and travel agencies, hotels, and amusement services. However, investors in the TI reacted negatively to policies that directly addressed the pandemic, such as social distance policies (SDPs). These results are robustly confirmed when we measure abnormal returns by using a three-factor model. The results offer useful insights for policymakers and practitioners aiming to mitigate economic loss from disasters such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207