Market Rules: Economic Union Reform and Intergovernmental Policy-Making in Australia and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brown argues that internal barriers to trade and competition in these countries were significant obstacles to competition in the global economy and shows that the old market rules were rooted in longstanding political and regional compromises. He describes the process of detailed and difficult intergovernmental collaboration required for the EU, and now Canada and Australia, to produce new market rules. The resulting reforms created new regimes that provide deeper and broader national economic integration in Canada and Australia than in the EU. The new rules entrench neo-liberal values, retaining some room for diversity and flexibility for equity goals. Built on a careful analysis of the differences and similarities in political economy, constitutional design, federal culture, and history of intergovernmental relations in Canada and Australia, Market Rules provides fresh evidence that federal states can be strong and autonomous in the global society, while underscoring the conditions for effective collaboration that make this sustainable. Rich in detail, broad in scope, Market Rules makes a significant contribution to knowledge about federalism and economic policy-making in the era of globalization.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".