The <scp>EU</scp>'s Post‐<scp>L</scp>isbon Free Trade Agreements: Commercial Interests in a Changing Constitutional Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article examines how the Common Commercial Policy in the post‐Lisbon era impacts citizens' rights both within the EU and in the partner countries. The EU's aspiration to pursue a normative agenda through trade has further been reinforced by the Lisbon Treaty, both with regard to the objectives of external action and the reformed trade policy‐making processes. Concurrently, however, the EU has refocused its trade strategy on growth and competitiveness, and strongly advocated the conclusion of ‘new generation’ free trade agreements. These agreements combine an ambitious ‘WTO‐plus’ agenda with normative issues such as provisions on human rights, a social dimension and sustainable development. The result of this dual approach is a mixed ‘constitutional balance’: whereas constitutional rights and competitiveness have the potential to reinforce each other with positive synergy effects, they may also result in tensions and policy incoherencies.
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 | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".