Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a dynamic, rapidly liberalising and fiercely competitive international environment, Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries see the pooling of their national efforts through the Caribbean Single Market and Economy as a central plank for overcoming their numerous constraints and advancing their economic growth and sustainable development. However, to succeed in the often challenging and fiercely competitive international setting, strategic and supportive external partnerships are vital. The region has therefore been exploring new relationships while it seeks to strengthen and deepen those that have existed for some time, to ensure that they make the intended contribution to helping the region achieve its goals.Caribbean countries are pursuing their trade and investment relations with their established partners while also expanding economic relations with hemispheric partners and other emerging global players. The shifting global trade landscape, however, has implications for the region and for its trade and economic policy.This discussion paper undertakes a preliminary exploration of some of the initiatives and relationships, both new and long-standing, that have an impact on the region’s trade and economic performance. These include the European Union and its economic partnership agreement with the Caribbean Forum, the USA (Caribbean Basin Initiative) and Canada (CARICOM–Canada free trade area negotiations). It will also look at the shifting global trade landscape, including the emergence of mega regional trade areas such as the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".