MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417068996 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.23259

Labor Market Impact on Homelessness: Evidence from Canadian Administrative Data on Shelter Usage

2025· preprint· en· W4417068996 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Damba Lkhagvasuren, Purevdorj Tuvaandorj

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnemploymentDuration (music)Affect (linguistics)Psychological interventionProxy (statistics)Unemployment rateIndigenousPublic policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The overwhelming majority of homeless individuals are jobless, despite many expressing a willingness to work. While this strong individual-level link between homelessness and unemployment is well-documented, the broader impact of labor market dynamics on homelessness remains largely unexplored. To fill this gap, this paper investigates the impact of local labor market conditions on the duration of homelessness, using individuals' homeless shelter usage records as a proxy for measuring their homelessness duration. Specifically, drawing on Canada's National Homelessness Information System data from 2014 to 2017, we analyze how local employment growth and changes in the local employment rate affect shelter usage duration. Our findings reveal that a 1% increase in local employment is associated with a 0.11-quarter (approximately 0.33-month) reduction in the average duration of shelter usage, while a 1% rise in the local employment rate leads to a 0.34-quarter (approximately 1.02-month) reduction. These changes correspond to decreases of 2.9% and 8.9%, respectively, in the average duration of shelter stays. The findings underscore the critical role of employment opportunities in reducing homelessness and lend support to job-oriented policy interventions for the homeless. In addition, the results suggest that demographic disparities-particularly the overrepresentation of Indigenous people and men among the homeless-are partially explained by slower exit rates from homelessness within these groups.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.221
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.265 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207