MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408764610 · doi:10.1093/icsidreview/siae039

International Investment Treaty Compliance in Canadian Federalism: A Multidimensional Challenge

2024· article· en· W4408764610 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreatyCompliance (psychology)FederalismInvestment (military)International investmentLaw and economicsPolitical scienceBusinessLawEconomicsPsychologyForeign direct investmentSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Canada’s federal system raises challenges for its compliance with international investment law obligations. The federal executive branch holds the power to enter into treaties on behalf of Canada, but treaty implementation depends on a variety of actors within the Canadian federal system, many under provincial jurisdiction. Provinces can take measures that violate Canada’s international investment treaty obligations. The federal executive has no ability to stop them, yet Canada remains liable for such violations internationally. Often, it does not know about the measures until they materialize. Rarely is it able to anticipate all the possible measures that could breach these obligations at the time it signs treaties. International investment arbitration raises specific challenges regarding treaty compliance for States—federal and unitary—both procedurally and substantively. This article examines how Canada’s federal design adds further complexity to this challenge. It proposes a fresh perspective to designing solutions that address these challenges, with the recognition that Canadian federalism offers no foolproof responses.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.239 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law JournalSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207