MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3187880076

Groundnut Export Tax in Senegal: Winners and Losers

2018· article· en· W3187880076 on OpenAlexaff
Ismaël Fofana, Ousmane Badiane, Alhassane Camara, Anatole Goundan

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityEconomicsProduction (economics)Market powerGovernment (linguistics)Agricultural economicsInvestment (military)BusinessInternational economicsMonetary economicsMarket economyEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Groundnuts are the most common cash crop and the main source of income for farmers in Senegal. Previously marginal, groundnut exports surged between 2011 and 2013. This new dynamic motivated the Government of Senegal to introduce a tax on groundnut exports in 2017. Senegal is a price-taker in the international groundnut market. Thus, the ex-ante simulation of the export tax on groundnuts results in a decreasing surplus for groundnut producers, while the surpluses of groundnut processors, the Government, and consumers increase. However, the positive effect on consumers is reversed if the introduction of the export tax is associated with a public investment-led groundnut productivity increase. The tax appears to be biased in favor of the export-oriented groundnut oil industry. Although the groundnut productivity increase mitigates the producers’ loss, it widens the benefit accruing to the groundnut processors. The induced increase of groundnut oil exports and the exchange rate effect exacerbate the producers’ loss. The associated negative income effect exceeds the positive price effect, leading to a decline in consumers’ surplus. Therefore, the introduction of an export tax does not necessarily increase consumers’ surplus in a country with weak market power. The economic structure and the external trade features of the country are as relevant as the fiscal policy decisions associated with the implementation of the trade reform.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→