MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074275330 · doi:10.1016/s1449-4035(04)70040-5

The Role of the Provinces in Canadian Foreign Trade Policy: Multi-Level Governance and Sub-National Interests in the Twenty-First Century

2004· article· en· W2074275330 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christopher J. Kukucha

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy and Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsBureaucracyPublic administrationCorporate governanceIdeologyJurisdictionPolitical scienceFederalismForeign policyMulti-level governanceConsistency (knowledge bases)Political economySociologyEconomicsPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Canada has a history of supporting the evolution of trade related multi-level governance structures. In the post-war period these commitments had limited implications for domestic policy space. Over time, however, these governance frameworks began to increasingly focus on areas of provincial jurisdiction. This paper argues that these developments have empowered a range of traditional and non-traditional actors within Canadian provinces. On an institutional basis, this includes engagement by provincial executives, bureaucratic interests, and emerging consultative structures within Canadian federalism. Sectoral interests have also responded by pressuring provincial governments to adopt specific policy positions. In addition, neo-liberal ideational factors are significant although some provincial governments have at times challenged this ideological consistency. Societal considerations, on the other hand, have the least impact provincially. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish between national and sub-national interests when evaluating Canada’s foreign trade policy. In the case of Canadian provinces it is clear that institutional, sectoral, and ideational factors are most prominent.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy and SocietySame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207