Trade Boomers: Evidence from the Commodities-for-Manufactures Boom in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract China’s growing prominence as a trade superpower has placed competitive pressure on manufacturing industries in Brazil, while simultaneously bolstering demand for its commodities. I investigate the effects of this so-called manufactures-for-commodities boom on Brazilian birth outcomes from 2000 to 2010. Exploiting exogenous variation in patterns of trade growth with China across different regions within Brazil, I find that both import and export growth led to higher birth weights for babies, and lower infant mortality rates. I also find that negative import shocks reduced fertility rates across all age groups for women, suggesting that selectivity in births induced by negative income shocks, combined with concentration of household resources on the children that are born led to better infant health outcomes. Additional evidence is consistent with income effects playing a role in explaining the results, while ruling out better provision of healthcare and changes to household composition as mechanisms. I also explore changes in trade-induced pollution levels and social assistance programs as a potential mechanism. The findings indicate that increased import and export growth can improve infant health, highlighting another potential benefit from trade liberalization.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".