MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2175379779 · doi:10.1111/pirs.12188

Foreign exports, net interregional spillovers and Chinese regional supply chains

2015· article· en· W2175379779 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jiansuo Pei, Jan Oosterhaven, Erik Dietzenbacher

Bibliographic record

VenuePapers of the Regional Science Association · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaUniversity of International Business and Economics
KeywordsUpstream (networking)ChinaEconomicsFinal demandPosition (finance)Value (mathematics)Production (economics)Quarter (Canadian coin)Added valueEconomic geographyInternational economicsGeographyMacroeconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study develops a method to decompose total national indirect value added effects (induced by final demand) into intraregional effects and interregional spillovers. The decomposition is applied to China's 2002 and 2007 interregional input–output tables with foreign-owned processing exports separated from normal exports. First, we find that interregional spillovers account for one quarter to one half of the total national indirect value added multipliers in 2007, with the largest spillovers occurring for the coastal regions. This finding is important when explaining regional value added generation and thus has real implications for regional policy programmes. Second, we develop a new measure, namely, ‘net interregional value added spillovers’ to position China's individual regions in the global production chains. This measure shows that upstream regions in the Centre, Northwest and Southwest of China are net recipients of interregional value added spillovers generated by foreign exports in coastal regions. Over time, this observation becomes more pronounced.

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)0.002
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 score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuePapers of the Regional Science AssociationSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207