Article 8 - CETA as the EU’s First Third-Generation Trade Agreement: Does It Act Like One?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the European Union (EU) has been hailed as the trend-setter for third-generation trade agreements, which focus predominantly on beyond-the-border impediments to international trade (e.g., rules and regulations) than at-the-border barriers (e.g., tariffs). CETA formed the basis for subsequent EU trade agreements, which are a key element of the EU’s trade policy. It also provided inspiration for third-generation trade agreements outside the EU. The big question for trade policy, in the EU and beyond, is whether third-generation trade agreements achieve their intended objectives with respect to beyond-the-border obstacles to trade. In other words, are they effective instruments in liberalizing international trade? After all, facilitating trade through regulatory and administrative cooperation is much more difficult than eliminating or lowering tariffs on imported goods. Having been in force (provisionally) for five years, CETA offers the best case to study the effectiveness of third-generation trade agreements.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".