MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138184895 · doi:10.1111/twec.13125

Evaluating the cumulative impact of the US–China trade war along global value chains

2021· article· en· W3138184895 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jie Wu, Jacob Wood, Keun‐Yeob Oh, Haejin Jang

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Economy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTariffTrade warChinaEconomicsInternational economicsValue (mathematics)International tradeGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The US–China trade war has been a key aspect of empirical review in recent times. Using the OECD Inter‐Country Input–Output Model, this study proposes an improved incomplete tariff pass‐through measurement method of cumulative tariff costs incurred across GVCs. Such an approach provides a more accurate picture of the impact of the US–China trade war on not only themselves but also third‐party countries. Our study found that five rounds of tit‐for‐tat tariff escalation has resulted in an indirect tariff burden of around 23 billion US dollars (USD) in total, of which 67% was caused by the US’s tariffs on Chinese imports. Moreover, perhaps unsurprisingly, the United States and China have suffered most economically, and in addition to direct tariff costs, they have to bear the indirect tariff burden of approximately 10 and 6.5 billion USD, respectively. This was followed by the EU, Canada and Mexico, which incurred indirect tariff costs of around 700 million to 1.7 billion USD. In addition, the burden on third‐party countries is expected to rise by 30%–70%, if we consider the hypothesis of complete tariff pass‐through.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations57
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld EconomySame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207