Closing the deal: What role for the provinces in the final stages of the CETA negotiations?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Why have the negotiations of a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the European Union taken so long? We argue that the delay is in good part the result of a weakly designed process for intergovernmental decision making: the role for provincial and territorial governments in international trade negotiations is still too limited and does not extend to final decisions about the text of any agreement. The limited role for provinces and the fact that there is no process that requires them to formally commit to an agreement leave open the real possibility that one or more provinces could choose not to fully implement any deal that is concluded. As a result, provinces possess negotiating leverage vis-à-vis Ottawa, thereby making it difficult for the federal government to agree to the trade-offs—which are of a geographical nature in CETA’s case—that are necessary for reaching a positive agreement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it