MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123969666

Plant Heterogeneity and Applied General Equilibrium Models of Trade: Lessons from the CA-US FTA

2004· article· en· W3123969666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Rolleigh

Bibliographic record

Venue2004 Meeting Papers · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsApplied general equilibriumEconometricsGeneral equilibrium theoryFree tradeEconometric modelInternational tradeMicroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Applied General Equilibrium models of trade failed to predict the sectoral changes in trade volumes following the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement. These models utilized a representative firm framework and used econometric estimates for the elasticities of substitution between home and foreign goods. I take a different approach on both fronts, modeling plants as heterogeneous and calibrating the elasticities to match estimated markups in each sector. I introduce these features by adapting a Hopenhayn (1992) model of plant entry and exit and embed this in a multisector trade model. The resulting model is very similar to Melitz (2003), but I focus on quantifying the effects of trade liberalization on trade flows and industrial structure. I calibrate the model using trade data between the United States and Canada before their Free Trade Agreement and evaluate the model's performance using later data. By successively shutting down various features of the model, I isolate the contribution of each. I find that calibrating the elasticities to markups improves the fit between model predictions and data significantly, from weighted correlations which are negative to values of 0.36. Incorporating plant heterogeneity and industrial data improves the weighted correlation to 0.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.215
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2004 Meeting PapersSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207