Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper provides an empirical analysis of the limited immunity for "export cartels" offered by the United States' Export Trading Company Act (1982). We have assembled a data set of 195 Export Trade Certificates of Review - all those created from when the first certificate was granted in 1983 through the end of 2004. We provide descriptive statistics on these ETCs, including the types of firms that apply for these certificates and the nature of the restrictions placed upon them by the Department of Commerce and the Department of Justice. We then estimate the determinants of the real value of U.S. product-level manufacturing exports from 1978 through 2004. We find that, controlling for the growth rate of exports in the industry, on average ETCs do not increase exports. In some estimates, the real value of exports actually falls after receiving an ETC. There are two possible explanations for this. One is that firms choose to obtain an ETC "Certificate of Review" when they are concerned that exports in the sector are going to fall. Receiving an ETC thus precedes this fall in exports, but does not cause it. The second possible explanation is that industries with ETCs can in fact exercise market power and the decline in the real value of exports reflects a strategic reduction in the quantity of goods exported. Given the predominance of ETCs in relatively unconcentrated industries we believe the former explanation is more plausible.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".