Open Regionalism in a New Wave of Regionalization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regional blocs have spread to the whole world with usual speed. Some believe the box was opened by the Western Europe when they consolidated their European Economy Community by the Single Market Imitative that took effect in 1992 and by the Maastricht Treaty. Others blame the United States for the final shift when it signed a free trade agreement with Canada in 1988 and abandoned its forty years of opposition in principle to regional initiative. The new wave of calls a controversy. Nobody is excited about the new wave and opportunities it has brought about, but fear it may corrupt the efforts of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) or the World Trade Organization (WTO) to make progress toward global free trade. In the early 1950s, Viner called economists' attention to the distinction between trade-creation and trade-diversion effects of regional FTAs. In order to minimize the possibility of welfare-reducing trade blocs, the notion of regionalization is proposed. Trade blocs are required to satisfy the McMillan criterion of not lowering their trade volume with outside countries; they have to engage in a reduction of trade barriers against nonmember countries. Obviously, this is a particular form of open regionalism. We should note that, while an regionalism with a modest external liberation can be welfare improving, multilateral trade liberalization can be even more so.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it