Analysing the Finnish pulpwood market under alternative hypotheses of competition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Efficient functioning of the wood market is crucial in a country where the forest sector is of strong macroeconomic importance. We investigate the possibility of noncompetitive behavior of the buyers in the Finnish pulpwood market. We simulate the buyers' behavior under alternative competition structures (perfect competition, Cournot oligopsony, and monopsony) and compare the simulated equilibria with the observed behavior in the years 19881997. In the static models the pulp industry firms are assumed to maximize their short-run variable profits either under fixed production capacity or, hypothetically, under variable capacity. The results suggest that, during the boom years, the industry has been capacity constrained, sometimes even for monopsony output. During the recession years, the actual wood prices have often been between simulated Cournot oligopsony and monopsony prices. Hence, noncompetitive behavior of the buyers is possible during the recessions. The capacity investment behavior of the industry is explored with dynamic models. The conclusions from these models depend on the price elasticity of pulpwood supply used.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".