MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7010474684

If the US-China trade war is here to stay, what are the risks and opportunities for other GVC economies outside the war zone?

2021· other· en· W7010474684 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrade warProtectionismBilateral tradeTariffTrade barrierIncentiveChinaCommercial policyTrade diversionFree tradeInternational free trade agreement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last three years, trade tensions between the United States (US) and China have transformed a fairly open bilateral trading environment into a rather protectionist one. The new administration of the United States has maintained most of the bilateral tariffs and non-tariff barriers put in place by the previous administration. Moreover, incentives to diversify trade partners and localisation have been intensified following COVID-19-induced global supply-chain disruptions. Continuing bilateral trade tensions between the world's largest economic powerhouse scan be expected to have significant impacts on the rest of the world. While it is intuitive to conclude that bilateral trade restrictions create new opportunities for others, deep economic interdependence through Global Value Chains (GVCs) complicate matters considerably. Impact assessment needs to consider supply-side relationships between each economy and the two GVC giants. Therefore, in this paper, we develop an analytical framework based on input-output data to assess how existing trade flows will be affected by tariff escalation between the US and China. The aim is to identify potential winners and losers among third-party economies. More specifically, we used product-level data and a new UN-ESCAP WWZ decomposition technique of MRIO trade in value-added data to (1) model tariff's impacts on US-China bilateral trade and then (2) track how third-countries might be impacted via international supply-chains: both negatively, via lower exports in affected (tariffed) links, as well as positively via enhanced exports demand in alternative ones. We find that the current trade war has been overall positive for third-party economies, shifting US$ 61.1 billion in net exports away from the US-China link towards other economies. Due to export asymmetries in the US-China bilateral trade relationship, opportunities for third-party economies emerge more from the US tariff imposition than a vice versa. Indeed, our model indicates that the supply-side reconfiguration to avoid US tariffs accounted for more than 80% of third-party economies' gains, equivalent to US$ 49.5 billion in net exports coming from China to the US diverted. Mexico, Canada, Republic of Korea, Germany and Japan are among the top beneficiaries. Ultimately, lingering trade tensions between the world's two largest economies will continue to pressure international trade downwards, while accelerating pre-existing trends, such as diversification of supply chains.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)French-language works237,207