Bibliographic record
Abstract
2024 marks the 40th anniversary of the retirement of the amber-compact or "stubby" bottle as it became known as the official Canadian beer bottle. This paper focuses on the use of the “stubby” bottle as it is commonly known by Canada’s brewing oligopoly as a non-tariff barrier to trade- first in the 1960s against the larger-scale American brewers and then again in 2002 against local Waterloo brewer, Brick Brewing. The paper contains an account of the consolidation of the Canadian brewing industry beginning in 1930s leading to the creation of the brewing oligopoly we know today as, “The Big Three.” After establishing the rise of the oligopoly, the paper turns to examine how the Big Three use their joint power to create artificial barriers to trade, focusing on the development of the stubby bottle and its adoption as the official recital for Canadian beer for over 20 years. Ultimately it is argued that the stubby bottle succeeds as an informal barrier to trade against the Americans in the 1960s but fails against Ontario craft brewer, Brick Brewing in 2002 for the same reasons: the highly consolidated nature of the Canadian brewing industry and the Big Three’s exclusive control over the means of distribution in Ontario through Brewer’s Warehousing. “A Tall Order,” builds on existing scholarship to explore how Canadian brewers developed, consolidated and then used their joint power to control the Canadian market and how changes in both legal and governmental perspectives over the following four decades lead to the Big Three ultimately having their oligopolistic hold on over the Canadian brewing market loosened by 2002.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".