Adjustments in the South Korean beef import market under beef import liberalization policies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This report analyzes the implications for exporters of the policy of gradual liberalization of beef importation that preceded the phasing out of state trader importation in the South Korean beef market. The process of beef trade liberalization involved successive increases in import quota, and the allocation of this, through a simultaneous buy‐sell system (SBS), to increasing numbers of licensed Korean importing firms, for several years prior to January 1, 2001. At that time, state trading was entirely replaced by private sector importation. During the period of policy adjustment of beef importation, licensed importing firms, known as “supergroups” (i.e., SBS firms), acted as designated SBS import beef traders for groups of end‐use businesses. The importation of beef is analyzed based on a model of the import behavior of the SBS firms for the period 1995 through 2000. The econometric model focuses on the source preferences of importers; the results suggest the importance of alliances of importers with various beef exporters. Model simulations suggest that with further import growth, the United States is likely to remain a major player in the Korean import beef market and that Australia may also gain from growth in this market. [EconLit citations: F14, L19, L66.] © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Agribusiness 20: 201–216, 2004.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".