The Influence of Buy American Policies on Canadian Coverage under the World Trade Organization Agreement on Government Procurement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite incremental trade liberalization of Canadian public procurement since the 1981 GATT Code on government procurement, Canadian provincial and territorial procurement remained outside the World Trade Organization Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA).The reason was the perceived discriminatory use of small business set-asides and Buy American policies in U.S. public procurement.After the 2008 economic downturn, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) injected billions of dollars into the U.S. economy.Together with lucrative business opportunities, the Buy American provisions of the Recovery Act were sufficiently trade restrictive to be a force for trade liberalization.To avoid exclusion of Canadian suppliers from contract opportunities, Canadian sub-central governments assumed commitments under a revised GPA.The article reviews Buy American policies as an impediment and incentive to Canadian coverage under the GPA.It explains Canadian federal, provincial, and territorial coverage under the agreement and discusses the salient issue of procurement review.VOL. 46, NO. 4
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 | 0.006 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".