MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of Brexit on the Transport Industry

2018· article· en· W2943208576 on OpenAlex
Martin Kerridge

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLogistics and Transport · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicState Capitalism and Financial Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrexitReferendumPledgePrime ministerGovernment (linguistics)Political sciencePoliticsCoalition governmentEuropean unionPolitical economyLawPublic administrationEconomicsInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By referendum on 23 June 2016, voters in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland voted narrowly to leave the EU. The vote was called for party political reasons, as the ruling Conservative party was divided on the issue of continued EU membership, and the Government expected that a national pro-EU popular vote would silence those who wanted to leave. When the result turned out to be the opposite of what the Government expected, the Prime Minister resigned, despite an earlier pledge that he would abide by and implement the result. The new Prime Minister – who had voted to remain in the EU – repeated the pledge, even though the referendum had been an advisory, not a binding, one. The subsequent period has been spent in trying to achieve an agreement that minimises the adverse socio-economic consequences, to both sides, of a UK departure from the EU, prior to the declared leaving date of 29 March 2019. This paper examines likely effects of Brexit on the transport industry. It starts by explaining the meaning of Brexit, the timetable for UK exit, and some of the possible reasons why the referendum vote turned out as it did. (There has been a surprising lack of research into this subject, and none was undertaken by the UK Government in the aftermath of the vote.) The paper then considers the possible trade and commercial alternatives that the UK has to EU membership. ‘Norway’ or ‘Canada’ (or Canada Plus) arrangements were part of the internal discussion in the UK in the period after the referendum (which had not included a question on alternatives). A UK Government insistence (‘red line’) that the UK would no longer be subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, which interprets EU law, limited the options available to the UK. The possible consequences to the UK, if it leaves the EU without a mutually acceptable withdrawal agreement, are then considered. Having set the background to this possible event, the paper then looks at how it may affect the transport industry. All modes of transport, other than inland waterway transport which has no direct connection between the UK and other EU countries, are examined. In each case new agreements will be needed to avoid serious disruption in the event of a ‘no-deal’ Brexit that removes the UK from the single market and customs union, with the UK then being regarded as a third country for trade and transport links. The final part of the paper examines the likely effect of Brexit on the economies of the UK and the remainder of the EU (and hence transport demand). It finds that Ireland may be the most affected EU country, but that the economy of the remaining EU-27 as a whole will suffer as a result of Brexit. After Ireland, the UK economy will be hit hardest, and we may never know if that is a result that the ‘leave’ voters in 2016 expected or not.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.214 · 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