MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Security and Prosperity Agreement as an “Indicator Species” for the Emerging North American Environmental Regime

2007· article· en· W1491378381 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitics &amp Policy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRegulation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProsperityStewardship (theology)Government (linguistics)HarmonizationPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsGeographyEconomicsLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2005 trilateral Security and Prosperity Agreement (SPP), with its emphasis on “quality of life” and “joint stewardship of the environment,” is a useful indicator of the state of environmental policy cooperation in North America. The SPP's environmental approach is ad hoc , disjointed and unambitious, consisting mainly of repackaged, “end‐of‐pipe” initiatives already being undertaken by various levels of government. Thus, the SPP has not changed the landscape for national policy makers in any significant way, that is, there is little evidence of regulatory harmonization as a result of SPP initiatives. Instead, the impact of the SPP may be more subtle; it helps to further institutionalize, implicitly and explicitly, a particular Prosperity Agenda, one which has been dominant in North America and views environmental problems as separate from economic dynamics. In this way, the SPP may act as a brake on domestic policy ambitions and does little to encourage a more thoroughgoing discussion of environment–economy linkages.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.634
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.260 · 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