Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we investigate the impact that judicial decisions relating to the recognition of aboriginal property rights have on long run resource industry and macroeconomic performance. We use four decisions handed down by the Supreme Court of Canada since 1973 to identify a range of economic consequences resulting from discontinuities in the formal, legal recognition of property rights. These consequences include the suppression of investment demand and supply incentives, reductions in resource industry profits, and reductions in real GDP per capita growth. To characterize the nature and importance of these effects we begin with a series of event studies which measure the impact that each court decision had on common share prices for firms engaged in the extraction and processing of Canada's forest resources. The share price effects reflect investors' perception of the decisions' impact on both the forestry firms' current access to resource stocks, and uncertainty surrounding the security of their property rights into the future. Stock access and uncertainty affect industry and macroeconomic performance in different ways. In the second stage of our investigation we use predictions drawn from finance theory and renewable resource theory to construct a partial equilibrium simulation model. With this model we quantify the impact that the stock access and uncertainty effects implied by the results of our event studies have on the forestry sector's economic fundamentals. In the third and final stage of our investigation we use the industry profit effects derived from the simulation model in a highly stylized general equilibrium model of the Canadian economy to estimate the impact that the Court's decisions had on real GDP per capita growth performance during the 1970-2005 period. Under certain circumstances the performance effects we measure can be substantial, but the cumulative impact varies widely depending on the combination of stock access and uncertainty implied by each of the Supreme Court decisions we study.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".