MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2166701794

The Building Blocks of Successful Regional Integration: Lessons for the CSME from other regional integration schemes.

2007· article· en· W2166701794 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachel Simms, Errol Simms

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegional integrationSupply and demandState (computer science)BusinessRegional sciencePolitical scienceEconomicsInternational tradeComputer scienceSociologyMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Building Blocks of Successful Regional Integration: Lessons for the CSME from other regional integration schemes. By Rachel Simms, LL.M, 2006 University of Toronto And Errol Simms, Senior Lecturer, Department of Management Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, U.W.I., St. Augustine. Regional Trading Blocs (RTBs) have become quite ubiquitous, with approximately 200 of them presently operating in the world trading system. However, many of these RTBs are not successful in their goal of improving the economic development of their respective regions. Indeed, in the last three decades many RTB’s have failed and have been dismantled. This paper seeks to identify the socio-economic factors which are necessary for successful regional integration. These factors have been divided by some commentators into demand factors, such as the potential for economic gain for each member state and supply factors, such as the existence of commitment institutions, for example a regional Court. This paper seeks to identify and examine the demand and supply factors for successful regional integration as distilled from past and existing regional integration experiences both in Latin America and in Europe. The paper will then go on to apply this learning to the CSME, by firstly assessing whether the requisite demand and supply conditions are met by the institutional arrangements of the CSME, and by suggesting ways in which the CSME can adopt, create or enhance the demand and supply factors which are necessary for successful regional integration.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.018
Scholarly communication0.0080.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→