MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012512294 · doi:10.1080/11926422.2020.1714682

Trade and conflict: trends in economic nationalism, unilateralism and protectionism

2020· article· en· W3012512294 on OpenAlexaffabout
Samuel MacIsaac, Buck C. Duclos

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Foreign Policy Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnilateralismProtectionismEconomic nationalismPolitical scienceNationalismMultilateralismInternational tradePolitical economyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protectionists have been accused of unraveling the multilateralist world order. The United States pulling out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement, and a series of tariffs imposed by both the US and China threaten global economic integration. Fierce protectionist rhetoric risks gridlocking a fragile trade system that faces rising discontent, especially in light of the recent globalization backlash. American geopolitical hostilities are also influencing trade policies, notably punitive tariff and trade sanctions. Meanwhile, these fears are not limited to trade. The ongoing challenge to American hegemony and rising globalization backlash are dangerous signals of economic unpredictability that could perilously escalate towards outright conflict. This special issue tackles these trends of rising economic nationalism, unilateralism and protectionism to shed light on these vital foreign policy issues and what they mean for middle powers such as 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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.015
Science and technology studies0.0050.018
Scholarly communication0.0170.012
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations31
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Foreign Policy JournalSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207