Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the Liberal Party of Canada's re-election in April 2025, Prime Minister Mark Carney has initiated a major reconfiguration of the federal government's approach to resource extraction and transportation projects, many of which implicate the country's Northern regions. Drawing on Bob Jessop's concept of “state projects,” this article offers historical context for better understanding this political and geographical shift by examining the Liberal government's “frontier-making state project” of 1973–84 that poured immense resources into accelerating oil and gas exploration in Canada's Arctic and Atlantic offshores. It identifies three fundamental characteristics of this historical state project—direct ownership/participation, financial and pricing incentives, and oil spill research—and traces their usage over time, including through the subsequent period of neoliberalization. It concludes by suggesting that the federal government's new vision for resource extraction and transportation represents the revival of a“frontier-making state project” that hybridizes an older style of government involvement with more recent aspects of neoliberalization. Building on Jessop's theoretical work and the historical example of the former state project, it also highlights the potential for conflict over and even failure of such a project in the context of intersecting pressures and contingencies.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".