MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W890744083 · doi:10.54648/trad2015018

A Protectionist Bargain?: Agriculture in the European UnionCanada Trade Agreement

2015· article· en· W890744083 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of World Trade · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtectionismAgreement on AgricultureInternational tradeInternational economicsSubsidyAgricultureTrade agreementEuropean unionNegotiationFree tradeEconomicsCommercial policyCustoms unionTrade barrierBusinessPolitical scienceGeographyMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The EU and Canada have been negotiating a preferential trade agreement - the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) - since 2009.The negotiations have been conducted in strict secrecy with an agreement only reached in late September 2014.This was the first time the text of the agreement was made public. This article examines those parts of the text of the agreement which pertain to agri-food trade. The facets of the agreement examined include those that directly affect agriculture - tariffs, TRQs, subsidies, safeguards and rules of origin - as well as other facets of the agreement that indirectly affect agriculture - pricing of wines, geographical indications, environment, sustainability, anti-dumping. The general conclusion is that little in the way of agricultural trade liberalization was achieved and protectionist interests were maintained.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.181 · 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