Identifying early warning signs of construction labor shortages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Construction labor shortages constrain project-level objectives and national development plans. The goal of this study is to utilize the lagged effects of macroeconomic conditions as early warning signs of construction labor shortages. To this end, the authors adopted a methodology, encompassing (1) retrieval of publicly available data and preprocessing of construction labor shortage as the target variable and macroeconomic measures as the explanatory variables, (2) identification of short-term associations between shortages and economic cycles using the Granger causality test, (3) examination of long-term relationships between labor shortages and economic conditions using the Johansen cointegration test, and (4) estimation of the impacts of economic conditions on labor shortages using the fixed-effects models. Results show that in the United States and Canada, interest rates and exports are the most significant leading indicators of construction labor shortages, with lags ranging from 12 to 15 months. Panel data analysis in the European Uinon and the United Kingdom reveals that a 1% increase in imports and building permits leads to increases in construction job vacancies by 1.19 and 0.63%, respectively, five quarters later. Findings highlight that by analyzing lagged macroeconomic indicators, construction practitioners can leverage the timely prioritize the strategies to mitigate labor shortages.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".