UK-Canada Trade Post-Brexit: Leading with Circular Economy Trade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explores the viability of and considerations for circular economy international trade, a new international trade concept developed from an established circular economy concept. This work derives insights from literature to initiate a new branch of international trade, augmented by several trade experts' reviews to ensure the feasibility of the ideas. Academic and practical insights include advice for future trade agreements and suggestions for future international trade research, opening up a new field of circular economy trade. The original 2018 academic research was jointly commissioned by the UK and Canada to consider how to design a trade agreement between the two countries post-Brexit. As of April 1, 2021 and as predicted by our original 2018 work, an agreement, called the Canada-United Kingdom Trade Continuity Agreement (Canada-UK TCA), much like the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the European Union is in place to support UK-Canada trade. CETA incorporates some principles of sustainable development. Taking sustainable development aims further by explicitly embedding circular economy trade into the UK-Canada agreement would represent progression of international trade agreements and possibly support a worldwide "race to the top". According to expert opinion, our nations could engage in circular economy trade because our countries are aligned on internal circular economy policy. Moreover, although traditional views on international trade could remain as barriers, even the World Trade Organization subscribes to this new model. Overall, this research opens up paths for future research opportunities in international trade.
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 | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.040 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.010 |
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".