Member state involvement in the area of EU exclusive competence: the case of the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Free and open trade is crucial for the European Union. Currently, the EU is the world’s largest trading bloc managing trade and investment relations with non-EU countries. The common commercial policy is the area of EU exclusive Competence. The Commission is responsible for legislation on trade matters, and for concluding international trade agreements. Despite this member states are not entirely excluded from trade negotiations. This thesis looks at negotiation process of the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) signed in 2016, with parts of it coming into force already in 2017. Using theoretical framework of liberal intergovernmentalism and principal-agent framework this thesis seeks to answer how, and to what extent, the large member states of the EU influence the negotiations of an international trade agreement. CETA case proves that large member states can influence the area of EU exclusive competence. Member states have been involved in certain stages of the negotiation process. Moreover, the level of influence depends on the domestic situation, governments’ stances and national interests.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".