MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992530326 · doi:10.24124/c677/200888

Alberta’s Port? Networked Federalism and the Port Development in Prince Rupert

2008· article· en· W2992530326 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
John F. Young

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Political Science Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPort (circuit theory)PoliticsBoomCorporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)Port authorityFederalismGateway (web page)Public administrationSociologyPolitical scienceEconomyHistoryPolitical economyLawManagementEngineeringTelecommunicationsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The opening of the Fairview Terminal in September, 2007 was an important landmark in the one hundred year history of Prince Rupert Port development. Despite the initial vision and plans of Charles Hays, a later boom provided by American troops during World War II, and another spike in development in the late 1970s, Prince Rupert has yet to fulfill its early promise as a gateway to the East. The recent emergence of container shipping and the construction of a new deep water container port is the latest in a series of efforts to fulfill that promise. Throughout its history, the port in Prince Rupert has been shaped and hindered by external political and economic forces, dependent on support from outside investors and government officials with little commitment to the local community. This paper examines these factors across time to illustrate specific dynamics that are critical components of contemporary development, and highlights the contributions and benefits of what has been termed elsewhere “network federalism.” Such a concept highlights the influence of multi-level governance, both vertical and horizontal, on public policy and development. The paper begins with a review of Rupert port development in the past, then turns to the present, and concludes with some comparisons intended to highlight prospects for the future, both in Rupert and in multi-level governance.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.269 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Political Science ReviewSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207