Staying Alive: North American Competitiveness and the Challenge of Asia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While analyses of "North American integration" after NAFTA continue to stress outdated notions of country-to-country trade and the exchange of finished products across national borders, our paper starts from the premise that what we have now is a single, integrated regional economic system whose expansion has followed the pace and contours of business strategies emphasizing continentally-integrated supply chains, but whose management via regulatory and policy coordination has lagged dangerously behind. Most dangerous of all has been the massive gap between our region's infrastructure needs – ports, transportation, and borders – and what has been coordinated and facilitated by the public sector. In this paper we investigate this current impasse from the point of view of reframing the competition with Asia's export giants – in particular China – as an impetus to enhance the competitive edge not of our national economies but rather of the regional economic system as a whole. We highlight the potential for synergy between the dynamism of cross-border regions such as the Pacific Northwest and their "gateway" strategies of coping with booming trade with Asia, on the one hand, and the aim of enhancing North American regional competitiveness via a more rationalized and effective continental transportation and infrastructure strategy. For example, British Columbia's plans to expand the Prince Rupert port facility, or the West Coast Corridor Coalition's plans for transportation links "from B.C. [British Columbia] to B.C. [Baja California]" would do well to explore their potential to connect with developing transportation networks and trade corridors in the center of the continent, as well as emerging export centers on the Eastern seaboard (Halifax/Atlantica), and on Mexico's Pacific coast. In keeping with North America's unique integration pattern – decentralized and business-driven – this focus on cross-border regions and public-private partnerships could bridge the infrastructure gap, linking local concerns with greater continental prosperity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".