MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379259135 · doi:10.1016/j.jge.2023.100071

Weak states and the commons: Fisheries and economic development in the Gaspé Peninsula circa 1830

2023· article· en· W4379259135 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vincent Geloso, Félix Foucher-Paquin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Government and Economics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsDesjardinsCredit Valley Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonsProperty rightsPeninsulaEnforcementTragedy of the commonsBusinessEconomyEconomicsMarket economyFisheryCommercePolitical scienceGeographyLawMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inefficiencies of common property fisheries are well-known to economists. To avoid over-exploitation, they propose multiple forms of government solution such as taxes, quotas and the enforcement of property rights regimes designed to avoid over-harvesting. But can efficient arrangements also exist under statelessness, or in the presence of weak states? One such example is the Gaspé Peninsula (in the Canadian province of Quebec) during the first half of the nineteenth century. There, a single firm (the Charles Robin Company) came to dominate the market and was able to restrict entry effectively. In this paper, we explain that it was able to do so by reducing the prices on imported goods that it would give to local fishermen in exchange for a part of their catch. This had the effect of deterring fishermen from contracting with other merchants as well as deterring other merchants from entering the market. It also made the region richer than most regions of Canada at the time, contrary to what historians have depicted. We take this as an example of the ability to deal with commons problems in the presence of weak states.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Government and EconomicsSame topicHistorical Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207