MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391948321 · doi:10.32782/2308-6971/2023.2.2

LAND LEASE IN THE USSR: ORGANISATIONAL AND FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF IMPLEMENTATION

2023· article· en· W4391948321 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Oleksandr Fradynskyi

Bibliographic record

VenueCustoms Scientific Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Socio-Economic Development Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeaseBusinessFinanceEnvironmental planningEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to study the issue of organisation and financial support of the lend-lease as a form of military-economic cooperation between the Allies of the Anti-Hitler Coalition during the Second World War.The results of the study were obtained by applying the dialectical method of cognition of phenomena of a legal and economic nature and relating to the study of the phenomenon of land lease as an integral element of the State's foreign economic activity and a method of providing military and economic assistance.In addition, the author used statistical methods to summarise, systematise and analyse the material; tabular methods to visualise the analysed data; and abstract and logical methods to substantiate theoretical positions and formulate conclusions.At the beginning of the Second World War, the Soviet government conducted its procurement operations in the United States through the Amtorg Trading Corporation.Due to the civilian nature of its activities, Amtorg was replaced in early 1942 by the newly created Government Procurement Commission, which was responsible for organising supplies from the United States until the end of the war.An analysis of the sources of financing for allied supplies shows that 0.91% of all purchases from the US were made with cash; 0.65% of the goods received from the UK and 0.006% of the supplies from Canada.If the sources of financing include the loans received by the USSR from these countries at the beginning of the war, the share of payment will reach 0.96%, 30.3%, and 7.27%, respectively.All shipments of goods under the lend-lease system were insured by the Foreign Operations Department of the USSR State Insurance.The insurance operations themselves were carried out by engaging the Black Sea and Baltic General Insurance Company Limited, a Black Sea and Baltic insurance company.The role and importance of the customs authorities grew in the context of the implementation of the land lease.The main burden of customs clearance and control fell on the customs offices in the northern (Arkhangelsk and Murmansk), southern (Baku, Dzhulfinsk, Gaudan) and Far Eastern (Vladivostok) regions.With the outbreak of hostilities on the territory of Ukraine, customs were liquidated, but in January 1944, the process of their re-establishment in the liberated port cities began.The problem of paying for supplies under the lend-lease arose after the end of hostilities.It concerned not only the USSR, but all the countries receiving American aid.Each of them had its own approach to determining the amount of debt and the specifics and procedure for paying it.The last payment to repay the debt for Soviet supplies under the lend-lease was made on 21 August 2006.Amtorg and the Government Procurement Commission were responsible for organising the supply under the lend-lease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueCustoms Scientific JournalSame topicRegional Socio-Economic Development TrendsFrench-language works237,207