MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033446603 · doi:10.1108/jadee-07-2019-0096

Export competitiveness and concentration analysis of major sugar economies with special reference to India

2020· article· en· W3033446603 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.

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

VenueJournal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Trade and Competitiveness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Revealed comparative advantageComparative advantageInternational tradeIndex (typography)SugarEuropean unionBusinessInternational economicsCustoms unionEconomicsEconomyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper seeks to examine the export competitiveness and concentration level of the 15 top sugar exporting countries over the last 18 years (2001–2018) with special reference to India. Design/methodology/approach First, the paper utilizes a review based approach and explains the structures of major sugar economies in context to protected and unprotected perspectives. Subsequently, empirical research was carried out to assess the competitiveness level of sugar using Revealed Comparative Advantage (RCA) approach and Hirschman Herfindahl Index. Findings The study found structural changes in cane or beet sugar, and molasses over the time period between 2006 and 2015. Further, the findings confirmed that despite the stringent regulations in European Union, the United States of America, Guatemala, Mexico, Thailand, China, and India, the comparative advantage is high up to seven to nine sugar categories. Besides, despite the indulgent regulations in the Colombia, Brazil, and Canada, the comparative advantage is only consistent up to two to three sugar categories. Research limitations/implications This study provides an overview of competitiveness patterns of 15 sugar exporting countries and further compare their comparative and concentration levels. In this context, in future, it would be interesting to study the macro-economic and firm and industry-specific factors which may strengthen the study findings. Practical implications This study suggests that the sugar export of few countries (i.e. Mexico and Canada) is restricted up to their trade pacts and free trade zones which is restricting the competitiveness level and performance. Accordingly, such countries need to enlarge their business boundaries to foster their export competitiveness level. Rational subsidies and governmental assistance in diversification schemes in terms of products' range and sustainable processes can make India a consistent exporter in more categories. Originality/value Although, the previous studies attempted to examine the sugar industry with particular country context, this study enlarge the body of knowledge through simultaneously examining the sugar export scenario of fifteen sugar exporting countries and providing a broad comparative view of their competitiveness and concentration levels.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.202 · 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