MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157382513 · doi:10.24124/c677/200718

The Political Economy of Canadian Hydro-Electricity: Between Old “Provincial Hydros” and Neoliberal Regional Energy Regimes

2007· article· en· W2157382513 on OpenAlex
Alexander Netherton

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Political Science Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsVancouver Island University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic rentEconomicsSubsidyElectricityIndustrialisationConsumption (sociology)ElectrificationRedistribution (election)PoliticsMarket economyPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The “quasi-staples” status of hydro has to be reflected in any summation of its “post-staples” trajectory. Staples analysis has always focussed on the creation and redistribution of economic rents, technological change, and trade issues. Each of these features has been prominent in each of the three regimes of hydro-electricity which have characterized the Canadian industry. In the formative period, the key rent-related issues were the distribution of rents to subsidize industrialization, and the process of urban electrification. In the second, mature staples, period, rents were distributed through “cheap rates” to subsidize and facilitate the development of mass production and mass consumption. In the third, post-staples, period rents and linkages are oriented towards sustainable development. Hence ‘smart’ consumption has replaced ‘mass’ consumption and “demand side management” has replaced the “cheap power” policy.

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)0.002
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 score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.210 · 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