MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2011638098 · doi:10.4043/17563-ms

Canada's Competitive Regulatory Framework - Atlantic Canada Perspective

2005· article· en· W2011638098 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bill Saunders, Bridget Cameron

Notice bibliographique

RevueOffshore Technology Conference · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
ThématiqueGlobal trade and economics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesU.S. Department of Energy
Mots-clésPerspective (graphical)Computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction Using Experience. Since November 2003, industry, governments and regulators have been fully engaged in a project to identify opportunities for improvement in the regulatory systems governing oil and gas activities offshore Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia. The first wave of change, now completed, used recent experience to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of regulatory processes. The second step, now underway, involves renewal of the regulations with an objective of introducing more performance based or "goal oriented" criteria, where applicable, enabling efficient adaptation of new technologies and industry best practices. Working Collaboratively. There is no "one size" fits all when it comes to regulating offshore oil and gas activities. Some regimes consolidate the gateway to these interests through a single agency, while others require industry to address some of them directly with the responsible departments. Regardless of whether the interests are consolidated or addressed directly, the tensions among them remain. In Canada, we are using our own experience and lessons learned from others to bring multiple government and industry players to the table and align interests collaboratively. The Multiple Public Interests in the Offshore. The marine environment represents a significant challenge for governments because of the multiplicity of ocean interests. In general terms, the interests and issues that must be considered by offshore regulators and policy-makers include the following:Health and safety of workers - the primary challenge is to create regimes that ensure safety is not compromised. Within this challenge is the need to mesh land-based Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) experience with offshore OHS experience.Co-existence with other marine uses - the issue is primarily fishing and the degree of complexity depends upon the robustness of the fishing industry, gear types and proximity to exploration and development.Environmental interests - including the need to comply with national and International standards and agreements; waste disposal (drilling fluids, cuttings, produced water) in the marine environment; cumulative effects; oceans management regimes including Marine Protected Areas; seismic sound regulation and protecting marine species.Co-existence with other marine laws - brings into focus the regulation of other shipping interests and regulation for specialized offshore vessels such as mobile drilling units. The issue of marine security is also a significant one for the offshore in the post 9-11 environment.Economic Interests - cover the remaining significant area for regulatory challenge in the offshore. The interests include: local business development, capabilities and expectations as well as taxation, duties, and trade rules. Atlantic Canada Context and Background Canada - a federation. The fact that Canada is a federation is at times a strength and at others a challenge. Responsibility and jurisdiction for many matters is often not divided but instead is shared. As a result, although accountability is often shared as well, it also means the outcome is often a blend of national and provincial interests, which makes for more stable and enduring outcomes. In the case of Atlantic Canada's offshore oil and gas activities, political Accords were signed in the mid-eighties to merge provincial and federal offshore responsibilities.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,731
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,193
Écart entre enseignants0,172 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2005
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOffshore Technology ConferenceMême sujetGlobal trade and economicsTravaux en français237 207