MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lobbies and the USMCA: the role of interest groups in the negotiation of the New NAFTA’s investment rules

2025· article· en· W4408708177 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lucas Silva Amorim

Bibliographic record

VenueAnuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e ComunicaçõesConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsNegotiationInvestment (military)International economicsInternational tradeEconomicsPolitical scienceBusinessPsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the USMCA (United States – Mexico – Canada Agreement) negotiation process that led to the replacement of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), fulfilling a key Trump-era promise. Focused on Chapter 14’s investment provisions, our analysis uncovers the different outcomes for government contract investors, that were able to maintain the protection levels and ISDS (investor-state dispute settlement) access, to the detriment of other investors. Emphasizing the legal framework involving 25 advisory trade committees linked to the United States Trade Representative (USTR), we scrutinize a 40-document corpus, revealing the significant influence of interest groups, notably the National Manufacturers Association. Findings illuminate the intricacies of economic agreement negotiations and underscore lobbies’ substantial impact on U.S. foreign economic policy formulation.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnuario Mexicano de Derecho InternacionalSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207