Economic Development and Canada’s Gateways: A Tale of Two Regional Development Agencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA) and Western Economic Diversification Canada (WD) are regional development agencies (RDAs) created to forge links between federal economic development priorities and local interests. RDAs in Canada follow a pro-trade agenda in support of local economic growth, but their strategies were adjusted in the 1990s to a new regionalism mindset, which emphasizes decentralized and collaborative leadership. In this article, we examine how both agencies responded, respectively, to the 2007 federal designation of an Atlantic Gateway on the East Coast, and an Asia Pacific Gateway on the West Coast. We combine a content analysis of each RDA’s yearly reports from 2007 to 2020, with a network analysis of their involvement in gateway projects funded by the federal government during this period. The combined analyses show the centrality of ACOA in gateway initiatives in Atlantic Canada, and the peripheral role of WD in Asia Pacific gateway initiatives.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".