MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7009345091

Econometric Insights into Fiscal Federalism : Assessing risk-sharing in the United States, Canada and the European Union

2024· article· en· W7009345091 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigitala vetenskapliga arkivet (Diva) (Karlstad University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policies and Political Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuropean unionRedistribution (election)Fiscal federalismCurrencyCurrency unionStability and Growth PactFiscal policyFiscal unionMember states
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the redistributive and stabilizing effects of fiscal transfers within the United States, Canada, and the European Union, focusing on the period from 2000 to 2022. Asymmetric shocks pose challenges to the stability of currency unions, potentially incentivizing regions to exit the union, while the need for social cohesion within a currency union fosters a demand for redistributive flows between regions. With monetary policy constrained within a currency union, the fiscal system could play a key role in stabilizing income in response to asymmetric shocks. Using a quantitative approach with panel data, the study explores long-term income redistribution and short-term stabilization. The findings reveal that Canada exhibits the highest level of redistribution, with an estimated 25 percent of income disparities reduced through taxes and transfers, followed by the United States at 16 percent. In contrast, the European Union shows minimal redistribution, with little to no significant income equalization across member states. On the contrary, there is evidence that the fiscal flows at the European level move from poorer to wealthier member states, rather than the opposite, suggesting that these flows serve purposes beyond the direct welfare of citizens. In terms of stabilization, the results are inconclusive, although estimates were obtained. Stabilization was divided into two effects, where the delayed effect of stabilization was estimated using data that was lagged once, and the instantaneous effect, using non-lagged data. The delayed effect is estimated at 81 percent for the United States, 55 percent for Canada, and 52 percent for the EU. The instantaneous effect of stabilization is estimated at 53 percent for the US, 11 percent for Canada, and 0.4 percent for the EU. However, these estimations are subject to concerns of stationarity and autocorrelation issues in the time series. As such, no definitive conclusions on stabilization could be drawn from this study.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigitala vetenskapliga arkivet (Diva) (Karlstad University)Same topicFiscal Policies and Political EconomyFrench-language works237,207