MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2234190365

The effect of trade liberalization on firm-level profits:an event-study approach

2016· preprint· en· W2234190365 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Holger Breinlich

Bibliographic record

VenueLondon School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsTariffRatificationInternational economicsEconomicsFree tradeProfit (economics)NegotiationLiberalizationOffset (computer science)International tradeMicroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I use an event study approach to present novel evidence on the impact of trade liberalization on firm-level profits. Using the uncertainty surrounding the negotiation and ratification process of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement of 1989 (CUSFTA), I estimate the impact of different types of tariff reductions on the abnormal returns of Canadian manufacturing firms. I find that Canadian import tariff reductions lead to lower, and reductions in Canadian intermediate input tariffs to higher abnormal returns. The impact of U.S. tariff reductions is less clear and depends on the size of the affected firms. I also calculate the total profit increase implied by my estimates. Overall, CUSFTA increased per-period profits by around 1.2%. This was mainly driven by intermediate input tariff reductions which more than offset the negative effect of Canadian import tariff reductions.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLondon School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→