MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406999861 · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2025.102801

Trade protection via tariff rate quota administration

2025· article· en· W4406999861 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. Aleks Schaefer, Christopher A. Wolf

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Food and Agriculture
KeywordsTariffAdministration (probate law)International tradeInternational economicsEconomicsBusinessPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In January 2022, the first dispute settlement panel convened under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) ruled that administration procedures for Canadian tariff rate quotas (TRQs) on U.S. dairy products violated Canadian trade obligations. Canada subsequently published new dairy quota administration policies to comply with the ruling. Using a dataset with monthly bilateral dairy trade flows at the 6-digit level from January 2014 to October 2023, we empirically assess the economic outcomes associated with this dispute from the perspective of the U.S. dairy industry . We find that — even under Canada’s original quota administration procedures — Canadian dairy TRQ concessions represented meaningful trade liberalization relative to the pre-USMCA status quo. However, in light of Canada’s revised procedures following the panel ruling, U.S. exports to Canada experienced a substantial increase for affected dairy products . This indicates that Canada’s original quota administration procedures represented a “binding” trade restriction beyond the negotiated quota. USMCA dispute settlement procedures effectively worked to remove the barrier.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.675

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.184 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood PolicySame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207