MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409708068 · doi:10.1080/02722011.2025.2454203

From Export-Led to Consumption-Led Growth: The Evolution of the Canadian Growth Model Since the 1980s

2024· article· en· W4409708068 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Prosper Bernard

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Review of Canadian Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrowth modelConsumption (sociology)EconomicsMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this article is to leverage analytical insights from the growth model perspective to explore the evolution of Canada’s growth pattern from the 1980s to the late 2010s. The paper makes four empirically informed observations. First, although Canada’s growth prospects initially appeared to be closely tied to exports, its economy pivoted to consumption-led growth in the 2000s, where it stayed in the 2010s. Second, lawmakers facilitated housing financialization as a way to bolster domestic consumption until the global financial crisis of 2007–08. Third, although the financial crisis did not wreak havoc on the Canadian economy, policymakers responded prudently by moderating financialization in the housing market. Finally, rising income inequality, slower real wage growth, and higher housing-related expenses contributed to debt accumulation among lower-income households and to the slower growth of household consumption in the 2010s.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.273
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Review of Canadian StudiesSame topicEconomic Theory and PolicyFrench-language works237,207