MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3011009037 · doi:10.1111/caje.12586

The role of non‐discrimination in a world of discriminatory preferential trade agreements

2022· article· en· W3011009037 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kamal Saggi, Woan Foong Wong, Halis Murat Yildiz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFree tradeInternational tradeInternational economicsLiberalizationConstraint (computer-aided design)World tradeEconomicsIncentiveBusinessMicroeconomicsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In a three‐country model of endogenous trade agreements, we study the implications of the most‐favoured‐nation (MFN) clause when countries are free to form discriminatory preferential trade agreements (PTAs). Under current rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO), although non‐member countries face discrimination at the hands of PTA members, they themselves are obligated to abide by MFN and treat PTA members in a non‐discriminatory fashion. The non‐discrimination constraint of MFN reduces the potency of a country's optimal tariffs and therefore its incentive for unilaterally opting out of trade liberalization. Thus, MFN can act as a catalyst for trade liberalization. However, when PTAs take the form of customs unions, the efficiency case for MFN as well as its pro‐liberalization effect is weaker because one country finds itself deliberately excluded by the other two as opposed to staying out voluntarily.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.161
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.017 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→