Firms in International Trade: Trade Policy Implications of the <i>New</i> New Trade Theory
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper explores the implications of recent developments in firm‐based trade theory and empirics for trade policy and negotiations. While traditional trade theory focused on the country, and the new trade theory of the 1980s adopted the industry as the unit for analysis, the newest theory emphasizes the role of firms and firm heterogeneity in international trade. We describe insights from this reformulation of theory and the empirical literature that illuminates it. The realities of trade as now understood show the need for a new new trade policy. Evaluating trade at the level of the firm implies that overcoming firm‐level fixed costs of trade and reducing uncertainty lead to increased trade along margins that generate the highest productivity, innovation and welfare gains. The traditional market access agenda ought now to be less important on the multilateral agenda than services, standards, trade facilitation, procurement and innovation policy. The analytical needs of a new new trade policy require new models and more access to firm‐level data to formulate and evaluate the multifaceted impacts of trade policy.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it