From the Board: The Paradox of Proliferation and Contestation of Economic Integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integration'With the delivery of Opinion 1/17 on 30 April of this year, a major constitutional hurdle has been cleared for the European Union allowing it to include investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms in its international agreements with third states.The Opinion was requested by Belgium following the 'Walloon crisis' in 2016: Wallonia's refusal to consent to the federal government's signature of the EU's landmark trade-deal with Canada, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), unless Wallonia's conditions were met. 1 The Walloon crisis was met with an extraordinary level of despair among the EU institutions.Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker lamented that 'if we would not be able to conclude a trade deal with Canada, I do not see how we can conclude trade deals with other parts of the world' and European Council president Donald Tusk stated that he was 'afraid CETA could be our last trade agreement'.The EU has since concluded the Japan-EU Free Trade Agreement (JEFTA) with Japan and is on course with its negotiations for trade deals with Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Mercosur, and even the United States.These statements remain remarkable.Juncker's comments suggest that it is not the content of an agreement that is decisive of whether or not it should be democratically approved, but the trade partner with which it is concluded.Tusk's comment reflects a broader mantra in international economic law: that we must continuously negotiate new international economic agreements or face the end of the world as we know it.There is always a need for bigger, better, and more expansive levels of economic integration, similar to the need to keep peddling on a bike if one doesn't want to fall off.There is no way the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and its diplomatic form of dispute resolution could be an achievement in and of itself.There is a persistent need for new negotiations crossing new frontiers: from tariffs to non-tariff barriers, from positive to negative lists, to regulatory cooperation, to public procurement, to competition, 'From the Board: 'The Paradox of Proliferation and Contestation of Economic Integration''.
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 | 0.021 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.032 | 0.029 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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".