TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE AND IMPORT COMPETITION: Experience in the U.S. Footwear Industry: 1980-1997
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article analyzes the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program within NAFTA, the U.S.-Israel Free Trade Agreement (FTA), U.S.-Canada-FTA, and the Orderly Market Agreement (OMA) for the footwear industry. It evaluates costs and benefits as well as factors affecting TAA's certification and denial processes following trade liberalization. A three-stage least-squares (3TLS) model correlates the a priori specifications we developed from the literature and evaluates TAA's enhancement of net consumer surplus. The benefits have significant, independent effects on four census regions of the United States engaged in footwear production. A simulation of the results indicates some robustness in the estimates and supports the Department of Labor (DOL) rule-of-thumb statements of job gains due to trade liberalization. The results are supportive of the bipartisan NAFTA agreement. Due to TAA's benefits to displaced workers, positive net benefits have been substantial from the inception of NAFTA, in 1994, to 1997.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".