MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051020871 · doi:10.1093/publius/pjp030

Federalism and Fiscal Policy: The Politics of Equalization in Canada

2009· article· en· W2051020871 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublius The Journal of Federalism · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLocal Government Finance and Decentralization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismPoliticsFiscal federalismPolitical sciencePublic administrationEconomic historyLawHistoryDecentralization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fiscal equalization is a key political issue in many federal countries, including Canada. Yet, relatively few scholars have paid systematic attention to the political dimensions of Canada’s federal equalization program. Taking an historical and institutionalist perspective, this article explores the politics of equalization policy in Canada, with a focus on the mid-2000s, a period when equalization policy suddenly became a major source of intergovernmental conflict. The main objective of the article is to explain why and how such political struggles over equalization developed. The explanation focuses on four factors: (i) the importance of executive discretion over the equalization program; (ii) the “inter-state” nature of Canadian federalism; (iii) the concentration of non-renewable natural resources in certain provinces; and (iv) the perceptions that surround the program.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.255 · 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