MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2273846818

Green Energy Politics in Canada: Comparing Electricity Policies in BC and Ontario

2012· article· en· W2273846818 on OpenAlexaffabout
George Hoberg, Ian Rowlands

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectricityCorporate governancePoliticsEnergy policyContext (archaeology)Renewable energyBusinessPublic policyCabinet (room)Political sciencePublic administrationPublic economicsEconomicsEconomic systemEconomic growthGeographyEngineeringFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote economic development, many jurisdictions are reforming their electricity sectors with new policies designed to promote clean energy In Canada, the two most active jurisdictions in this regard are Ontario and British Columbia. Both provinces embarked on aggressive sustainable energy (especially electricity) policy initiatives in the 2000s that have become intensely politicized. This paper will compare these two provincial policies to develop insights into Canadian provincial politics on significant environmental and nature resource issues and energy policy dynamics more generally. For each province, we briefly describe the electricity system and how it is governed in terms of relations between public and private operators, the role of regulatory commissions and their relationship to the parliamentary system in place. We then describe and compare the policy shifts during the 2000s and early 2010s, focusing on efforts to promote renewable electricity and the policy instruments used to do so. We also address the dynamics of the political backlash that occurred in both provinces, and how the party in power responded to those criticisms. The main purpose of this paper is to reveal the similarities and differences in the two provinces’ energy policies, but we will also offer some explanations for those patterns. The institutional structure of energy governance in Canada gives cabinet governments a significant amount of latitude to enact and implement ambitious policies. The particular manifestation of governance structures, policy objectives and policy instruments will vary depending on factors specific to the provincial context. The increased costs of low-carbon energy policies are proving to be a significant political issue, but the extent to which they will frustrate the achievement of larger policy objectives is not yet clear. In both provinces, highly ambitious clean energy policies have experienced considerable implementation challenges and political resistance. Despite the adjustments that have been made to address these difficulties, the fundamentals of the policy shifts are still in place. These cases reveal that when motivated, leader-centered parliamentary governments can create meaningful policy change to promote energy sustainability.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.267
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0090.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207