From Calgary to Canberra: Resource Taxation and Fiscal Federalism in Canada and Australia
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
Intergovernmental conflict over the allocation of resource revenue in federal systems is not uncommon. However, there is remarkably little scholarship on how such political tensions are managed in different federations and whether, over time, resource politics can reshape federal dynamics. This article assesses these questions through a strategic comparison of resource federalism in Canada and Australia since the 1970s. We argue that the political and institutional strategies employed within the Canadian federation, with its greater commitment to fiscal and political decentralization, has been more adept at managing short term political tensions associated with resource booms relative to the Australian model, with its creeping centrism and entrenched system of horizontal equalization. The study also finds that, over time, resource conflict has the potential to shape the practice of federalism in resource-rich jurisdictions by providing political incentives to decentralize nonrenewable resource revenue collection.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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