Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far
Impact in
Classified as
- Journal
- Journal of Economic Literature
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1257/002205104773558056 →Countries where authors are citing Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far
This map shows the geographic impact of Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far
This network shows the impact of Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far.
About Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far
This paper, published in 2004, received 692 indexed citations . Written by L. Alan Winters, Neil McCulloch and Andy McKay covering the research area of General Economics, Econometrics and Finance, Sociology and Political Science and Economics and Econometrics. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Economics and Econometrics (415 citations), General Economics, Econometrics and Finance (395 citations), Sociology and Political Science (248 citations), Development (128 citations) and Strategy and Management (75 citations). Published in Journal of Economic Literature.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.
This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1257/002205104773558056.