Why Delay the Inevitable: Why the AIIB Matters to Canada’s Future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Yesterday was the deadline to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) as a founding member. Once again Canada is on the sidelines as Asia and most of the rest of the world moves forward while Canada watches. When Chinese President Xi Jinping announced plans for the AIIB at the APEC summit in Indonesia in 2013 and launched the initiative in Beijing at the China-hosted APEC summit a year later, who would have predicted that such an idea would cause an international furor. The new Bank has garnered significant headlines for two reasons. One is American opposition to the China-led Bank; and two is that some see it as a rival to the World Bank and other multilateral banks. The official U.S. position is that the AIIB is a rival to these institutions and that the funds would be better channeled through the World Bank and the Asia Development Bank. We argue that the AIIB is a welcome Chinese initiative, in line with American calls for China to become a ‘responsible stakeholder’ in the international system. The AIIB will become a multilateral development bank that finances programs addressing huge infrastructure deficits in the Asian region. Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, the smaller and newer members of the ten-country Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), for example, are emerging from years of economic and political isolation to join the region’s economy. Connecting them to each other and their larger neighbours, including China and India, requires major investments to create modern transportation corridors and other infrastructure, including electronic connectivity. Infrastructure development is also integral to a shared vision of integration of the region’s economies to be an engine of global growth. We also argue that The AIIB reflects a world where the majority of global GDP will soon be produced in Asia, and where the infrastructure needs in the region are enormous. Canada has much to offer in terms of skills and expertise in building infrastructure. For Canada it is important to look west, as well as south and east in this century. Failure to join the AIIB would be another failure to make inroads in Asia.
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 | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.042 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.004 |
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".