Bibliographic record
Abstract
New Zealand is a signatory to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) consisting of 11 countries. NZ does not have any bilateral trade agreement with three member countries viz., Canada, Japan, and Mexico which account for 73% of CPTPP’s GDP. Presently, NZ accounts for less than 1% of the merchandise imports of these countries. This paper investigates whether CPTPP membership would enable NZ to increase its exports to these member countries. In other words, does CPTPP membership enhance NZ’s Trade Intensity with the selected member countries? An analysis of the Trade Intensity Indices show that the value of trade with Canada, and Mexico is less than optimal, and with Japan it has been on the decline which can be attributed to the fact that these countries mostly import high value added goods such as capital goods whereas, NZ mostly exports primary goods such as animals. A further analysis of NZ’s Revealed Comparative Advantage reveals that NZ’s comparative advantage is mostly concentrated in primary products. As a consequence, the scope for NZ to enhance its exports to the selected member countries is limited in the post CPTPP era, and any gains arising out of the agreement would be mostly in the form of tariff reductions, and relaxation of non-tariff barriers. The contribution of this paper is about highlighting NZ’s product-wise Revealed Comparative Advantage in relation to the selected member countries, which reveals that NZ has the potential to export Intermediate and Consumer goods, in addition to the Primary goods.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".