Introduction: International Context, Domestic Interests, and Mexican Trade Reform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
THE PROBLEM The inauguration of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on January 1, 1994, ushered in a new era in trade relations for Mexico, the United States, and Canada. This date also marked an end of sorts, the culmination of a dramatic turnaround in Mexican trade policy that transformed the Mexican economy from one of the most closed to one of the most open in the developing world. This process began in 1983, accelerated between 1985 and 1988, and has been consolidated since 1990 with the emergence, negotiation, approval, and implementation of NAFTA. Over a span of scarcely a decade, the governments of Miguel de la Madrid and Carlos Salinas de Gortari reversed four decades of trade policy predicated on an import-substituting industrialization (ISI) model of development intended to promote the industrialization of the Mexican economy through the restriction of most imports by a variety of high trade barriers, including tariffs, quantitative restrictions, import licenses, and official pricing mechanisms. Trade is not the only aspect of the Mexican economy that has undergone important changes since the early 1980s. Recent governments have freed domestic prices, relaxed exchange controls, stabilized inflation, opened the foreign investment regime and domestic capital markets, privatized nearly 90 percent of the country's state-owned enterprises, cut government spending, and reformed the tax system (see Edwards 1995). But what is perhaps most surprising about the post-1982 period is that trade protection, which historically had been one of the most consistent elements of Mexican development policy, was effectively dismantled in almost all sectors of the economy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".