THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF CANADIAN TRADE POLICY FROM 1881 TO 1925 EUGENE BEAULIEU* AND
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Draft: Do not cite or quote without permission. Abstract: This paper considers the political economy determination of tariff protection in Canadian manufacturing industries between 1881 and 1925. The paper presents international trade and tariff data as well as industrial characteristics over this period. Empirical studies of this topic have typically focused on a narrow cross-section for their conclusions and have yet to consider the possibility of trade barrier persistence effects. In this study, the hypothesis that inter-industry tariff patterns may exhibit a degree of persistence is examined by comparing the structure of tariffs at two points in time: 1881 and 1925. The paper finds that some industrial sectors have consistently been dealt higher amounts of tariff protection as a result of both government policy and the strength and organization of their industries. This suggests that pressure groups from these industries were more successful than others in lobbying decision makers for protection, while also supporting the notion of a benefactor government that sought to assist injured industries and redirect industrial activity through trade policy. Moreover, the paper finds a high level of persistence in the structure of tariffs across industries between 1881
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".