Power Politics and the Free Trade Bandwagon
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What explains the world's newfound enthusiasm for free trade? Are government leaders integrating their economies to achieve Pareto-improving gains? Or is it because a critical mass of pro—free trade governments has acquired the capacity to “go it alone,” leaving would-be protectionists with a choice between a bad option (opening their markets at very high political cost) and an even worse alternative (incurring the still higher political costs of exclusion)? This article suggests that in practice, mutual-gains-seeking motivations are frequently dominated by defensive ones. The North American Free Trade Agreement is a case in point: Without in any way being bullied or coerced, the Mexican and Canadian governments agreed to take part in a multilateral arrangement that the evidence suggests neither much liked. Although hard to reconcile with the political economy literature's positive-sum model of international cooperation, this finding is consistent with the broader “power-politics” model introduced here.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it