The Effects of North Korea ’s Mineral Export on Various Imports (in Korean)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the relationship between mineral exports to China, North Korea’s most important source of foreign currency acquisition, and its imports of various items from China from the first quarter of 1995 through to the third quarter of 2019. The results from a cointegration analysis suggest that there exists a long-run equilibrium relationship between mineral exports and imports of food, fuel, and some intermediate goods, such as industrial supplies, parts, and accessories. The results from a vector autoregression using first-differenced variables indicate that the short-run relationship between mineral exports and imports is different between the period before and after the third quarter of 2010. Prior to structural changes, i.e., before the third quarter of 2010, import shocks affected mineral exports. However, after the third quarter of 2010, an increase in mineral exports led to an increase in the import of vehicles, intermediate goods, and luxury goods. This paper shows both the possibilities and the limits that mineral exports can contribute to North Korea’s economic growth. The results, which show that mineral exports have a long-run relationship with intermediate goods, such as industrial supplies, parts and accessories, imply that mineral exports to China could have a positive effect on the North Korean economy. However, the fact that mineral exports do not have any significant effect on the import of machinery and equipment, which helps the accumulation of capital formation, shows that mineral exports have a limited effect on inducing long-term growth in the North Korean economy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".