MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transparency and Bidding Competition in International Wheat Trade

2004· article· en· W1528540563 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
William W. Wilson, Bruce L. Dahl

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorth Dakota State University
KeywordsStylized factTransparency (behavior)BiddingMicroeconomicsCompetition (biology)EconomicsNash equilibriumInformation asymmetryIndustrial organizationCompetitor analysisBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the trade policy issues identified by U.S. interests, including grower groups, traders and policy makers, is price transparency. This has been a point of contention between the United States and Canada as well as other exporting countries with state trading enterprises (STEs). The transparency problem generally refers to the inability to observe terms of trade (including price, quality, credit, etc.)offered by STEs, and the potential strategic advantage this provides in bidding competition. A game theory model of import tendering is developed in this paper to examine the effects of information asymmetry among rivals. Several stylized examples are used to illustrate aspects of competition and to analyze effects on bidding strategies. Results indicate that: Less uncertainty among rivals reduces equilibrium bids and prices. Tenders with less transparency have the effect of increasing prices to buyers and payoffs to sellers. Increases in the number of rivals have the effect of reducing bids and mitigating the informational advantages of STEs. In all cases, less transparent sellers have an advantage in bidding relative to more transparent sellers. That advantage in our stylized case is in the area of $1–2/t. However, the advantage is reduced when there are many transparent rivals and in the case where transparent players act as agents for an STE.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.158
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicEconomics of Agriculture and Food MarketsFrench-language works237,207