MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096939344

1A Theil decomposition of Latin American income distribution in the 20th Century: Inverting the Kuznets Curve? E.H.P.Frankema Groningen Growth and Development Centre

2006· article· en· W7096939344 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInequalityLatin AmericansIncome distributionEconomic inequalityIncome inequality metricsKuznets curveTheil index
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper applies a Theil decomposition method to investigate long run changes in the functional income distribution of 20th century Latin America. Kuznets argued that the economic transition from a traditional rural into a modern urban economy eventually results, after an upswing in the early phase of industrialisation, in sustained lower levels of personal income inequality (Kuznets’ inverted U-curve hypothesis). In spite of various phases of strong economic growth and profound structural change a sustained decline in inequality has not taken place in Latin America. This paper argues that the apparent persistency of its inequality levels is the consequence of a trade-off between declining rural-urban income differences and increasing urban sector income differences. Urban sector inequality in a sample of major Latin American economies (Argentina, Brazil, Chile) was, from the start of the 20th century until the 1970’s, comparable to other advanced New World economies (USA, Canada, Australia). Yet, since the 1970’s initial levels of rural and rural-urban inequality were overtaken by a rapid increase of urban inequality in virtually all Latin American countries. In some cases this increase has been so pronounced that the Kuznets ’ curve should be “re-inverted ” to accurately picture the secular inequality trend.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.196 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEconomic Theory and PolicyFrench-language works237,207