MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319455527 · doi:10.1017/9781009082440.009

Disputes Involving Agricultural Domestic Support

2023· book-chapter· en· W4319455527 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubsidyAppealAgreement on AgricultureAgriculturePrice supportChinaInternational economicsDomestic marketMarket accessAgricultural policyInterpretation (philosophy)EconomicsInternational tradePublic economicsBusinessPolitical scienceMarket economyLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Settled disputes involving agricultural domestic support, often in conjunction with export subsidies, are reviewed in this chapter, including economic circumstances, main arguments and findings, and policy responses. Differences and overlap between obligations and arguments under the Agriculture and SCM Agreements are articulated. Contrast is drawn between adjudicated MPS measurement for China wheat and rice and India sugarcane (under appeal). A modified measurement of MPS is proposed using market-based lagged reference prices. US cotton support found to cause significant price suppression and the eventual policy continuity at the end of this long dispute are examined. Cross-subsidization of exports resulting from domestic support measures for Canada dairy and EU sugar, and consequent reform particularly of the sugar regime are assessed. Each dispute arose in relatively egregious market interventions circumstances, clarified interpretation of the WTO rules, and has demonstrated limits on some types of domestic support.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicAgricultural Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207