The Effects of CUSFTA and NAFTA on Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the effect of the Canadian-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) case frequency and determinations against Canada and Mexico, respectively. These free trade agreements (FTAs) may have affected U.S. AD/CVD activity both through increased trade volumes and through the establishment of new Chapter 19 dispute settlement procedures to review national AD/CVD decisions when requested. Using a panel database of U.S. AD/CVD activity from 1980 through 2000, the paper generally finds no evidence that either increased import volumes or Chapter 19 dispute settlement activity affected the frequency of U.S. AD/CVD cases or affirmative determinations against Canada and Mexico. An exception is evidence that cumulative remands by Chapter 19 dispute panels to review U.S. decisions against Canada have led to fewer new affirmative AD/CVD decisions against Canada. These results have implications for future negotiations of PTAs and WTO rounds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".