MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092076701 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v11n5p254

Trade Facilitation Effects on International Trade: Evidence From Lower-Middle and Upper-Middle-Income Countries

2020· article· en· W3092076701 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alassane D. Yeo, Aimin Deng, Todine Y. Nadiedjoa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Office for Philosophy and Social Sciences
KeywordsTrade facilitationFacilitationEconomicsMiddle incomeEmpirical evidenceMiddle levelInternational tradeTrade barrierInternational economicsBusinessDemographic economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an empirical analysis of the impact of trade facilitation on international trade, as well as the effects of two dimensions: hard and soft infrastructure. Using 18 primary variables, we constructed four indicators of 30 lower-middle-income and 33 upper-middle-income countries over the period 2011-2017. After applying the system-generalised method of moments (GMM), the main finding is that all trade facilitation indicators have a significant effect on exports. However, improvements in physical infrastructure are more likely to increase exports than the efficiency of borders, transport, information and communication technologies (ICTs) and institutions, from the most significant to the least significant. It is also found that the effect of hard infrastructure on exports is virtually the same as that of soft infrastructure. Hard and soft infrastructure must therefore be considered at the same level, as the effectiveness of international trade depends on both.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207