China's exports in a world of increasing oil prices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to examine the impact of oil prices on trade's sensitivity to distance. Furthermore, it seeks to investigate if the nature of trade and the type of goods have a mediating role on the oil prices' impact on trade. Design/methodology/approach A set of gravity models are estimated on a unique panel dataset from China Customs Statistics that reports trade by customs regime (processing trade vs non‐processing trade) and by transportation mode (air vs sea) for the years 1988‐2008. Findings Higher oil prices increase the sensitivity of China's exports to distance. This effect is especially pronounced for processing exports, where goods cross borders multiple times. On the other hand, it is smaller for exports shipped by air. While these results are statistically significant, their economic effects are relatively small. This paper estimates that the quadrupling of oil prices between 2002 and 2008 has increased the elasticity of Chinese exports with respect to distance by a mere 5‐7 per cent. Social implications The surge of oil prices in recent years has led to speculation that rising transportation costs could end the period of dramatic world trade growth – in the words of Rubin, “[…] Your world is going to get a whole lot smaller.” This paper suggests that this concern is overstated. Originality/value This is the first paper that estimates the mediating role that the nature of trade and the type of goods play on trade's sensitivity to distance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".