MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of U.S. Government Antiterrorism Policies on Canada-U.S. Cross-Border Commerce: An Exploratory Study from Western New York and Southern Ontario

2006· article· en· W2103724496 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alan MacPherson, James E. McConnell, Anneliese Vance, Vida Vanchan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Professional Geographer · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)Exploratory researchExploratory analysisGeographyEconomyRegional scienceSociologyEconomicsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the extant and potential impact of U.S. antiterrorism policies on Canada-U.S. cross-border commerce. Particular attention is focused on the cross-border trade that takes place between southern Ontario (Canada) and western New York (United States). Evidence from a survey of Canadian and U.S. exporters suggests that U.S. antiterrorism measures have inflated the business costs of exporters on both sides of the border. These measures have also created shipment delays that ultimately imply lost revenues for producers, as well as higher prices for consumers. Security-related initiatives motivated by a genuine concern for the well-being of U.S. citizens may nevertheless act as nontariff barriers to bilateral trade. We argue that a potential long-run consequence of these additional costs is trade diversion. The article concludes with a brief discussion of the implications of the empirical findings for the geography of Canada-U.S. bilateral trade.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Professional GeographerSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207