Fiscal Consolidation and Support for the Common Currency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The existence of a common currency and further integration within the European Monetary Union crucially depends on public legitimacy. As a response to the Global Financial Crisis and subsequent Sovereign Bond crisis, several European governments have implemented fiscal consolidation policies in an attempt to restore investors' confidence. According to its critics, though, austerity has also weakened public confidence in the European Union and its most visible economic symbol, the euro. Unfortunately, the simultaneity of recessions and fiscal consolidation makes it hard to disentangle the two effects empirically. Does austerity really decrease public support for the euro, or are they both explained by the macroeconomy? In this paper, we attempt to solve this puzzle relying on a rich dataset of fiscal adjustments that are weakly exogenous to the business cycle. The statistical analysis of a panel of 19 European countries and Eurobarometer surveys conducted therein between 2004 and 2019 suggests that fiscal consolidation in general, and expenditure‐based fiscal consolidation more specifically, affected support for the Euro negatively but that this effect is modest. We also find that these effects are conditional on both individuals' self‐placement on the political spectrum and their employment status.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".