Imperative for expediting African Continental Free Trade Area negotiations on e-commerce
Bibliographic record
Abstract
E-commerce was first included as a topic in a free trade agreement (FTA) in 2001. Since then, the number of FTAs that address e-commerce has been regularly increasing, now representing 30 per cent of all notified trade agreements with WTO. E-commerce is included in virtually all of the recent mega-regional trade agreements, including the concluded Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership and the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA), and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership agreement. On 10 February 2020, the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union: DECIDE[D] that Phase III Negotiations focuses on an AfCFTA Protocol on E-Commerce immediately after conclusion of Phase II Negotiations and DIRECT[ED] the African Union Commission to embark on preparations for the upcoming negotiations and mobilize resources during 2020 for capacity building for African trade negotiators to be involved in the negotiation of e-commerce legal instruments at the level of the African Continental Free Trade Area. This briefing note provides an illustration of the types of issues that can be approached in an African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) protocol on e-commerce. It makes a case for expediting those negotiations – given the considerable changes in the world economy since the thirty-third ordinary session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union, held in Addis Ababa on 9 and 10 February 2020 – particularly due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the imperative to build back better for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the value of consolidating a pan-African position on e-commerce negotiating issues, and to better enable coherence with the other protocols of AfCFTA .
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 | 0.055 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.007 |
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".