Shifting Paradigms of Parochialism: Lessons for International Trade Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much of the study of international private law has focused on exploring differences in legal systems in light of domestic issues or harmonization. Much less emphasis has been on accepting these various parochial interests as part of a global legal structure. This preliminary study into what drives parochial attitudes can help international trade scholars observe the traditions engendering these differing parochial attitudes and their impact on trade. Through a pluralist lens and in borrowing from studies in the social sciences on parochialism, this paper attempts to bring to light a world of "hybrid legal spaces" that adds complexity to the adjudication of commercial, foreign investment, and even trade disputes. It also asserts that these lessons can be useful in thinking about globalized legal education. Drawing from the experiences on teaching a course on NAFTA consisting of U.S., Canadian, and Mexican students, the author reflects on the impact of domestic parochial interests on issues of international trade and on ways that, particularly in the context of regionalism, building alliances beyond the parochial network can contribute to the formation of new common traditions that impact trade.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.091 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".