Canada-United States Energy Relations from Domestic to North American Energy Policies?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the 2008 American presidential race, Republican presidential hopeful Senator John McCain proclaimed to the Economic Club of Canada that "[Canada and the United States] must … work to ensure reliable energy supplies and increase sources of renewable energy … We stand much to gain by harmonizing our energy policies, just as we have gained by cooperating in trade through nafta." 2 Although Senator McCain was ultimately unsuccessful in his bid for the American presidency, his assertion was not surprising in the context of fluctuating energy prices, the global economic downturn, enduring concerns over energy security in the United States, the ascendance of climate change on domestic and international policy agendas, and increasingly integrated North American energy markets.McCain's recommendation was certainly not the first of its kind nor is likely to be the last.It does, however, raise a number of important questions for Canada and for Canada-United States and North American energy relations.What are the drivers of, prospects for and desirability of harmonizing Canadian and American energy policies?Would such harmonization involve energy in toto or only certain segments or functions of the industry?To what degree are energy policies already harmonized?Given the asymmetry between Canada and the us, would energy policy harmonization processes result in the Americanization of Canadian energy policies?If Canada and the United States were to pursue a path of harmonization, what processes to achieve this goal could or should be used?Finally, what is the place of Mexico in this dossier?
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.002 |
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".