Stefano Tijerina. <i>Opportunism and Goodwill: Canadian Business Expansion in Colombia, 1867–1979</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Opportunism and Goodwill: Canadian Business Expansion in Colombia, 1867–1979, Stefano Tijerina offers a much-needed contribution to the historiography of Latin American and Canadian relations. The author shows how “Canada, and more specifically Canadian businesses, played a critical role in the modern development of Caribbean and Latin American economies” (3). In the case of Colombia, Tijerina asserts that this relationship was fundamental to the economic development of both countries, allowing Canada to fill the gaps left from the two powerful investors in the region: the United Kingdom and the United States, since Colombia was not a main destination for foreign investments—in comparison to other countries, such as Argentina and Brazil. The book also demonstrates that it was the Canadian business sector that pushed for the development of a bilateral relationship with Colombia given that Canada’s link with the United Kingdom hindered a direct relationship with the region. Moreover, even after Canadian autonomy had been recognized by the Statute of Westminster in 1931, Latin America was not a priority for the Canadian government. This was a reality even though several countries, including Colombia, approached Canada for closer relations since this country “represented another potential export market as well as a feasible solution to increasing dependence on the US market” (103). Yet, as shown by Tijerina, it was only in the late 1960s that the Canadian government began providing political and institutional support to the private sector investing in Latin America. Consequently, Canadian business had a difficult time getting a hold in the region due to the lack of support from “a robust promotional state” (148).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".