ENSURING FOREIGN TRADE SECURITY AT THE REGIONAL LEVEL: WORLD EXPERIENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to examining global practices in ensuring foreign trade security at the regional level. It identifies modern tools and effective mechanisms that help regions strengthen their positions in international trade while mitigating risks and threats. The importance of ensuring regional foreign trade security is emphasized in the context of global instability, economic competition, and geopolitical threats, as this issue concerns not only the national level but also specific regions, cities, and communities that actively participate in international economic processes. The experience of EU countries is considered, where regions are active participants in foreign trade operations thanks to decentralization processes and access to EU structural funds, and where regional development agencies operate effectively. Attention is given to Germany’s experience, where federal states can have their own economic offices abroad to promote foreign trade, and chambers of commerce and industry outside the country offer German companies a wide range of services. The experience of the United Kingdom is studied, which supports the activities of nine regional directors for international trade. Based on the activities of relevant institutions and information networks, the experience of the United States in supporting the foreign trade of regional companies is demonstrated. Measures to ensure regional foreign trade security in China are examined, particularly through the creation and operation of free trade zones as export-oriented hubs with a high level of security. Japan’s experience in assisting small and medium-sized enterprises to maximize their global export potential and Canada’s experience in developing regional export diplomacy are also explored. It is substantiated that the experience of foreign countries in ensuring regional foreign trade security is relevant and useful for Ukraine, especially in the context of russian military aggression, complications in transport and logistics schemes, and increased vulnerability of regional development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".