MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Canadian federalism and the challenge of North American integration

2004· article· en· W2093179252 on OpenAlexaffabout
Geoffrey Hale

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Administration · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismPolitical scienceHarmonizationHumanitiesEconomyPoliticsWelfare economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Canada's growing economic integration within North America has not resulted in parallel trends towards greater political integration or in the general harmonization of policies and regulations, as was hoped by some observers and feared by others. This article explains the incremental adaptation of Canadian federalism to market‐driven economic integration and assesses the factors that contribute to and constrain federal leadership and guidance of these processes. It outlines formal and informal processes for managing and reconciling overlapping jurisdictions ‐described as “complementary federalism” ‐ that balance the pursuit of policy coherence and pressures for policy harmonization with the recognition and accommodation of regional interests. The author examines the development and limits of complementary federalism in three major policy fields ‐ trade policy, taxation and the regulation of financial services and capital markets ‐ affected by trends towards North American economic integration. Sommaire: L'intégration politique et I'harmonisation générale des politiques et des règlements n'ont pas suivi la même courbe ascendante que celle de l'intégration économique du Canada au sein de l'Amérique du Nord, selon I'espoir de certains observateurs et la crainte de certains autres. Cet article explique I'adaptation graduelle du fééeralisme canadien à I'intégration economique axée sur les forces du marché et se penche sur les facteurs contribuant ou freinant le leadership fédéral et son orientation de ces processus. Il expose les processus officiels et officieux permettant de gérer et de concilier les compétences qui se chevauchent ‐ décrits comme une forme de fédéralisme complémentaire ‐ afin d'équilibrer la recherche de cohérence en matiére de politiques, et les pressions exercées pour les harmoniser tout en reconnaissant et en ménageant les intérêts régionaux. L'article examine le déeloppement et les limites du fédéralisme complémentaire dans trois grands domaines de politiques ‐ la politique commerciale, la politique fiscale et la réglementation des services et des marchés financiers ‐ ces domaines étant affectés par les tendances vers une intégration économique nord‐américaine.

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 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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public AdministrationSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207