MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3190682118 · doi:10.3968/12149

Analysis of China’s Soybean Import: Based on the Perspective of Welfare Economics

2021· article· en· W3190682118 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dongmei Li, Song Liang, Zhu Qiang, Siyuan Lin, Jun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoybean genetics and cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversification (marketing strategy)ChinaMonopolyEconomicsWelfareTransaction costSupply and demandPrice elasticity of demandConsumer welfareIndex (typography)Agricultural economicsBusinessMicroeconomicsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

China’s soybean import meets the growing nutritional demand of Chinese residents, but the continuous increase in soybean import quantity has also caused disputes about over import. The continuous importation of soybean in China gradually forms a path dependence on some major exporting countries. On the analytic basis of soybean supply and demand in China, this paper employs CR index and HHI index to measure the import concentration of soybean, and analyzes the monopoly pricing mechanism of international soybean by adopting welfare economics method. The results show that the imported soybean has gained strengthened monopoly in China’s market, thus increasing the risk of consumers’ welfare in loss. From the demand perspective, the loss of consumer welfare can be reduced by lessening soybean demand and increasing demand elasticity. From the perspective of supply, the same objective can be also achieved by increasing market competition in diversification and reducing monopoly transaction costs. As a result, some policy suggestions can be thus put forward: firstly, it’s suggested to control the importation of soybean and augment the imported alternative products. Secondly, it’s recommended to reduce the transaction cost of the major exporters to China, and to promote an imported strategy in diversification by strengthening the cooperation with countries that join in the “belt and road initiative”.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicSoybean genetics and cultivationFrench-language works237,207