Bibliographic record
Abstract
Empirical evidence suggests that past levels of protection are significant determinants of current levels of protection. We investigate dynamic interactions among interest groups and resulting endogenous links between current and future trade policies. We explore these intertemporal links in a small open economy in which lobbying and tariff policies are the outcome of a dynamic game among factor owners. The model can generate cycles with prolonged periods of free trade and/or prolonged periods of restricted trade (i.e., persistent trade policies). An interesting aspect of the environment is the role of lobbying as a partial substitute for intertemporal trade. JEL Classification: F13, C73 Un modèle dynamique de politique commerciale endogène. Les résultats d'analyses empiriques montrent que les niveaux passés de protection sont des facteurs importants dans l'explication des niveaux de protection actuels. Ce mémoire analyse les interactions dynamiques entre groupes d'intérêt et les liens endogènes qui en résultent entre les politiques commerciales présentes et futures. On explore ces liens intertemporels dans une petite économie ouverte où lobbying et politiques tarifaires sont le résultat d'un jeu dynamique entre les propriétaires des facteurs de production. Le modèle peut engendrer des cycles où on observe des périodes prolongées de libre commerce et/ou des périodes prolongées de commerce restreint (i.e. des politiques commerciales persistantes). Il appert que le rôle du lobbying est un substitut partiel pour le commerce intertemporel.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".