Quantifying the trade‐reducing effect of embargoes: Firm‐level evidence from Russia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2014, Russia responded to sanctions imposed by a coalition of Western countries with a retaliatory import embargo. I draw on this unique case study and a customs data set on firm‐level import transactions to investigate the ramifications of Russia's counter‐sanctions on firm‐level foreign trade. Using detailed data and a triple‐difference estimation strategy, I examine micro‐level dynamics and heterogeneities that aggregate data alone do not reveal. I identify the effects of the embargo on the extensive margin (the probability that a firm imports a particular product from a given country in a particular time period) and the intensive margin (the value of a firm's import transaction) of firm‐level trade, as well as its effects on logged unit values. The main findings of this study show that the embargo had statistically significant negative impacts on extensive and intensive margins of firm‐level trade. I also pinpoint evidence of multiple exemptions from the embargo and a large degree of heterogeneity of firm‐level responses to the embargo based on firm attributes, such as firm size and government connection.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it