MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Issues in the smuggling of tobacco products

2000· book-chapter· en· W4388361590 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luk Joossens, Frank J. Chaloupka, David Merriman, Ayda Yürekli

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveBusinessLanguage changeRevenueTobacco industryTax revenueTobacco controlInternational tradePublic economicsPolitical scienceEconomicsLawMarket economyMedicinePublic healthFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter reviews several issues related to the smuggling of cigarettes and other tobacco products. First, the health and other consequences of cigarette smuggling are described, emphasizing the potential for cigarette smuggling to undermine tobacco-control efforts. This is followed by a description of the various legal, quasi-legal, and illegal activities that are broadly described as smuggling. The factors that create incentives for and/or facilitate these activities are reviewed, noting that non-price factors, such as the presence of corruption, organized crime, and widespread street-selling, can be as, or more, important than the levels of taxes and prices and the differentials between these in different jurisdictions. The impact of smuggling on tobacco tax revenues is then discussed, highlighting the experiences of Canada and Sweden, where cigarette taxes were reduced in response to the perception that cigarette smuggling was draining revenues. The role of the tobacco industry in smuggling is then discussed. Finally, a set of policy measures that can be used to counter cigarette smuggling is presented.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations62
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207