TRADE LIBERALIZATION BETWEEN MEXICO AND THE UNITED STATES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, there has been growing interest in the concept of linking the United States, Mexico, and Canada together in a North American Common Market. Due to the dismissal of proposals for broad arrangements such as a common market or a customs union, attention has turned to less ambitious forms of trade liberalization, namely, a free trade area or sectoral free trade agreements. The potential of these trade agreements deserves closer attention in both countries. This dissertation examines the effects of a hypothetical U.S.-Mexican Free Trade Area (FTA) in manufactured goods and discusses its possible trade creation and trade diversion effects. The hypothesis under study is that trade creation would outweigh trade diversion if all trade barriers were eliminated between both countries. This study provides policy makers with information about prospective effects of trade negotiations and highlights those industries which are likely to be most sensitive to tariff cuts. A partial equilibrium trade liberalization model is used to compute the short-run impact of the FTA. Estimates of trade diversion are based on the assumption that, in the absence of the FTA, the shares of Third Country suppliers would have remained constant. If these shares decrease, trade diversion has taken place. Trade creation is estimated by considering the expansion in consumption, or the reductions in the shares of domestic suppliers. The results show that trade creation is far greater than the trade diversion; however, they also show an uneven benefit. Mexico will increase its exports only be 15.3 percent, while the United States will increase them by 53.8 percent. Even on items where Mexico apparently had a comparative advantage, the United States will benefit greatly. It was seen that, on items where Mexico had a surplus, this turned into a deficit and, in the best of the cases, the surplus diminished dramatically. Among countries which are economic equals, economic integration comes naturally. Economic integration between unequals does not. In the case of Mexico, the political resistance to formal economic integration with the United States is reinforced by economic inequalities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".