Economic analysis of a softwood lumber quota regime and a policy to subsidize biomass generation of electricity.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The REPA spatial price equilibrium model developed in Chapter 4 is used to investigate the regional welfare impacts of a quota on exports of Canadian softwood lumber to the U.S. In the model, Canada is divided into seven regions and the U.S. into five regions, with the rest of the world constituting a 13th region; the model is calibrated to the bilateral trade flows that existed in 2016 when there was free trade in lumber. Various quota levels are examined in terms of their impact on producers and consumers in both countries. Canadian producers are found to be better off with a hard quota compared with free trade, although the quota leads to a reduction in market share while driving a wedge between Canadian and U.S. prices, both of which are aggravated with harder quotas. Overall, the loss of export sales to the U.S. is not recouped with sales to the rest of the world. The REPA model is also used to examine the impact of EU demand for wood pellets to generate electricity. Results indicate that pellet prices will approximately double.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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".