MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2252293387 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.207013

To Have or Not to Have the Common External Tariff: The CARICOM Countries Conundrum

2015· article· en· W2252293387 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lurleen M. Walters, David J. Harvey, Keithly G. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Food and Agribusiness Management Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTariffInternational economicsEconomicsProduct (mathematics)International tradeAgricultural economicsEuropean unionShort runBusinessMonetary economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study utilizes a source-based demand systems model to estimate demand for imported poultry products in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), and to evaluate the impact that modifications of the Common External Tariff (CET) would have on the demand for poultry products from the United States, Brazil, Canada and the European Union. Own price elasticities suggest that CARICOM’s poultry import demand is highly price responsive in both the short run and the long run, and that any significant increases in imported poultry prices could be expected to trigger greater than proportional decreases in quantities demanded from all source countries except Brazil. Results also suggest that if the CET were removed, all source countries would be able to expand poultry product exports into CARICOM. Canada is the only country that would decrease exports to CARICOM in the long run if the CET were removed. Poultry exports to the region from most source countries would contract with a doubling of the CET to 80%, in both the short run and the long run.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Food and Agribusiness Management ReviewSame topicEconomics of Agriculture and Food MarketsFrench-language works237,207