The Conceptions of Customs Duty and the Customs System as an Insrument of Protectionism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article discusses the main conceptions of customs duty and the customs system as instruments of economic protectionism, which play a key role in shaping and implementing the foreign economic policy of the State. The author examines the historical development of customs instruments, their classification, and application in various countries, including Ukraine, the European Union, the USA, China, and Canada. Special attention is given to the analysis of tariff and non-tariff barriers used to protect national production, stimulate the localization of production, and regulate foreign trade in the context of globalization. The study uses a comparative approach that highlights the peculiarities of the protectionist strategies of Ukraine and the EU, as well as assesses the efficiency of existing customs measures in the context of international obligations and internal economic challenges. The stages of customs reform in Ukraine have been analyzed, along with the issues of automation and the fight against corruption in the customs system, as well as the impact of customs duties on the State budget revenue. The author also illuminates modern trends and challenges, particularly the role of the Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) program, the implementation of digital risk management systems, and the significance of a balanced customs policy in ensuring the competitiveness of the national economy. Emphasis is placed on the necessity of flexible models of protectionism that combine protective measures with export support and the development of strategic sectors. The conclusions of the article are of practical significance for shaping an effective customs policy in Ukraine, which will contribute to enhancing the level of integration into the European and global trade space, strengthening national security, and ensuring stable economic 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.068 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".