Decontrolling, Price Transmission and Market Integration of Sugar Sector in India vis-a-vis Global market - A cointegration Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study analyses the extent, pattern and degree of the spatial integration of sugar markets in India, as well as relationship of white sugar export prices of India and global market. The pattern and degree of integration were assessed by testing for the existence of the Law Of One Price (LOOP) and ascertaining the speed of adjustment toward long-run equilibrium, using various tests by using cointegrated methods. Results have shown that only 4 of 11 sugar markets are integrated into a common sugar market. The supply of sugar appears to be the most important factor shaping the long-run behaviour of its price levels in India. No single market is found to be the price leader. The prices of sugar exported by India to the global market were not cointegrated and did not conform LOOP. Decontrolling of sugar sector from clutches of monthly release mechanism and export quota in India, plays an insignificant role in determining the relationship of sugar prices in the global market. The study suggests that improving the extent of market integration by focusing on the communication and other market related infrastructure and sugar policy reforms for more integration of domestic and global market. Acknowledgement : The presenting author is thankful to Director, ICAR- Sugarcane Breeding Institute for kind support to submit the paper to 30th International Conference of Agricultural Economists (ICAE 2018) in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 28 July 2 August 2018.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".