Regional Trade Agreements, Prosperity and the Global South:Normative Beliefs and Interests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book provides a thought-provoking critical analysis of the functionality of regional trade regimes in the Global South. It examines four regional trade agreements (RTAs) - the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Southern Common Market (Mercosur) and the United States-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement (USMCA). Ngangjoh Hodu and Ajibo argue that while there has been immense enthusiasm amongst countries in the Global South to create RTAs, this has not translated into concerted efforts to make the RTAs work as envisaged, resulting in RTAs that are largely lacking in concreteness. In this innovative work, the authors invite international economic lawyers and other stakeholders to reflect on how normative beliefs and interests inform inter-state relations and thereby, the law of regional economic community. In so doing, it argues that the idea of prosperity underpinning RTAs as they currently exist is more of a mirage than reality.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".