MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915781435 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2018-002

Do Subnational Trade Agreements Reduce Trade Barriers? Empirical Evidence from Canadian Provinces

2019· article· en· W2915781435 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational tradeNegotiationGravity model of tradeBilateral tradeTrade barrierInternational economicsRegional tradeBusinessTrade diversionFree tradeEconomicsInternational free trade agreementGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Canada faces threats to the global trading system, free trade between provinces within Canada remains elusive. Just as slow progress in multilateral trade negotiations has driven a proliferation of bilateral international trade deals, dissatisfaction with lack of progress federally has compelled Canadian provinces to sign bilateral agreements with other willing provincial partners. However, almost nothing is known about the efficacy of this approach. We use a gravity model to empirically investigate the effect of provincial agreements on interprovincial trade flows in Canada. We find that although most agreements facilitated trade between member provinces, others did not. We also find massive provincial trade barriers have declined by 15 percent over the past two decades in Canada.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.153 · 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