Will We Ever Have Paris? Canada's Climate Change Policy and Federalism 3.0
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have entered a new climate reality. In order to stave off the most dangerous and disruptive impacts of climate change, we must quickly dispense with business as usual in favour of a rather unusual law and politics. The historic and highly ambitious agreement concluded pursuant to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris in December 2015 sets the stage for just such an unusual law and politics. In order to fulfill the aspirations of the Paris Agreement, countries must respond with equally ambitious domestic mitigation measures. In the Canadian context, this calls for a new, aspirational conception of climate federalism capable of encouraging and empowering citizens to participate equally alongside their elected representatives amid the surrounding sources of social and economic power in collaboratively fashioning collective commitments to a sustainable future. After retracing the regrettable history of Canadian climate change and sustainable development policy, ranging from the federal government’s penchant for passing the buck to the provinces (federalism 1.0) to so-called federal-provincial cooperation, harmonization, and further federal retrenchment (federalism 2.0), this article articulates an aspirational conception of federalism capable of meeting Canada’s climate change commitments (federalism 3.0). The results of the application of this new federalism to Canada’s initial but potentially path-dependent climate policies and decisions taken in the early days of the post-Paris era, however, are far from encouraging. Canada’s initial climate policies and decisions fall significantly short of fulfilling the aspirations of either the historic Paris Agreement or the promise of a new constitutional law and politics, amounting instead to a kind of formal, “check-the-box constitutionalism.” Instead of true democracy, we are given “Deliverology”; instead of Paris, we are promised pipelines. Unless we immediately change course, the harm to both our constitutional culture and our climate may well be irreparable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".