MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910675267 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab4864

International crop trade networks: the impact of shocks and cascades

2019· article· en· W2910675267 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rebekka Burkholz, Frank Schweitzer

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersETH Risk Center
KeywordsStock (firearms)International tradeIntermediaryEconomicsOrder (exchange)International economicsGravity model of tradeBusinessGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Analyzing available FAO data from 176 countries over 21 years, we observe an increase of complexity in the international trade of maize, rice, soy, and wheat. A larger number of countries play a role as producers or intermediaries, either for trade or food processing. In consequence, we find that the trade networks become more prone to failure cascades caused by exogenous shocks. In our model, countries compensate for demand deficits by imposing export restrictions. To capture these, we construct higher-order trade dependency networks for the different crops and years. These networks reveal hidden dependencies between countries and provide an estimate of necessary stock reserves to protect countries from cascading export restrictions. They differ substantially from first-order networks that do not take cascading effects into account. We find rice trade most prone to cascading export restrictions. A great number of Asian and African countries are most exposed to cascades. Noticeably, the main suppliers are similar for most of the crops: USA, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, and India. While shocks in the USA mainly affect South America and several Asian countries, the south of Africa is primarily dependent on American and Asian exporters. The north of Africa depends strongly on Europe, in particular via wheat imports.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations77
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207