The conditions and potentials of federalizing trade policy: Comparing Canada and the United States
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whereas some federations reacted to the expanding international trade agenda by ‘federalizing’ trade policy-making and allowing sub-federal governments a substantial involvement, others did not. Comparing Canada and the United States, this paper investigates the conditions and potentials of federalization on the case of public procurement liberalization. The first section argues that the institutionalization of intergovernmental relations depends on the incontestability of sub-federal claims to authority and the absence of cheaper alternatives. In the US, the availability of federal pre-emption and the possibility to exclude sub-federal competencies from international agreements acted as a brake on state involvement. In Canada, ‘watertight’ provincial competencies and a non-representative second chamber enabled a gradual federalization. The second section argues that federalization holds the potential to increase constituent units’ openness to procurement liberalization. While their deficient involvement has constrained US states’ openness, federalization was instrumental in Canadian provinces’ recently growing openness for international suppliers.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it