The Impact of Bioenergy and Biofuel Policies on Employment in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental policy, particularly written to deal with climate change and the related issue of renewable or clean energy production, has the potential to change the capacity of businesses, states, and other organizations to provide employment opportunities. This paper reviews the development of environmental policy in Canada at the federal level as well as in two provinces (Ontario and British Columbia). Key policies include the Canadian renewable fuel standard (included in Bill C-30, the Clean Air Act of 2007) as well as Ontario’s Green Energy Act (Ontario Bill 150) and British Columbia’s Bioenergy Strategy. Our methodology describes employment associated with the bioenergy and biofuel sectors as concentric circles ranging from direct through indirect and temporary jobs, and describes forthcoming survey analyses that aim to quantify the impact that these policies have had on employment opportunities. We situate our findings within the context of an ambiguous climate or energy strategy at the national level, and discuss what may be at stake when labour issues are excluded from climate policy debates. The paper looks critically upon the strategic “greening”of economies, jobs and governance in Canada, while providing recommendations for future iterations of policy at the federal and provincial levels.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".