MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1508546855 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.23834

State Trading Enterprises: A Canadian Perspective

2000· article· en· W1508546855 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mel Annand

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceState (computer science)Perspective (graphical)PoliticsGovernment (linguistics)IdeologyFunction (biology)Law and economicsCarry (investment)EconomicsControl (management)Political scienceInternational tradeBusinessLawFinanceManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a Canadian perspective on the debate about state trading enterprises in the World Trade Organization. STEs carry out important economic functions as part of national policies. STEs can do this without distorting competitive equilibrium in trade. From an economic and legal standpoint, STEs can properly function within the WTO system. The paper comments on why WTO rules on STEs may be practically meaningless, given the lack of application of the STE rules in WTO dispute resolution. The suggestion is made that the direction of legal inquiry into STEs should focus on the question of trade influence, rather than on the political question of government control of STEs. The real economic trade effects of STEs are the important aspects of STE study, not the ideological aspects of STE governance.

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)0.002
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 score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0160.010
Scholarly communication0.0120.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicWorld Trade Organization LawFrench-language works237,207