MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965245861 · doi:10.1080/09557571.2019.1642849

Investigating the impact of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) on the contemporary world order: a case of Chinese SOE investment in the Canadian hydrocarbon sector

2019· article· en· W2965245861 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anastasia Ufimtseva

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge Review of International Affairs · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicState Capitalism and Financial Governance
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign direct investmentOrder (exchange)Investment (military)Market economyCorporate governanceWestern hemisphereBusinessState (computer science)Resource (disambiguation)International economicsEconomic systemEconomicsPolitical scienceMacroeconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs) have become an important source of foreign direct investment (FDI) in resource-rich countries. Their expansion has stirred a debate in the Western hemisphere about the ability of SOEs to challenge liberal economic practices and to alter domestic governance in the countries where they invest. This paper contributes to this debate by examining the case of Chinese SOE investment in the Canadian hydrocarbon sector. It uses insights from the literature on the world order, international business, and international relations to examine the impact of SOE investment on a host country in the Western hemisphere. As I argue, the Canadian response to SOE’s investment has been on the cautionary side, which opens avenues for institutional innovation that leads to stricter regulations of SOEs’ FDI. As I propose, stricter regulations can be reinterpreted as an attempt to support liberal economic practices, yet may unintentionally have the opposite effect.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge Review of International AffairsSame topicState Capitalism and Financial GovernanceFrench-language works237,207