1. Early contributors include Malinowski, B., Crime and Custom in a Savage Society (Paterson: Littlefield, Adams, 1926)Google Scholar; Pospisil, L., The Anthropology of Law: A Comparative Theory of Law (New York: Harper & Row, 1970)Google Scholar; Hooker, M., Legal Pluralism: An Introduction to Colonial and Neo-Colonial Laws (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975)Google Scholar.

2. For a sophisticated reading of the literature, see Fitzpatrick, P., “Law, Plurality and Underdevelopment” in Sugarman, D., ed., Legality, Ideology and the State (London & New York: Academic, 1983) 159Google Scholar.

3. See e.g. Galanter, M., “Justice in Many Rooms: Courts, Private Order and Indigenous Law” (1981) 19 Journal of Legal Pluralism 17Google Scholar.

4. Moore, S. F., “Law and Social Change: The Semi-autonomous Social Field as an Appropriate Subject of Study” (1973) 7 Law & Society Rev. 719CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5. See, for a general theoretical introduction, Griffiths, J., ”What is Legal Pluralism?” (1986) 24 Journal of Legal Pluralism 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and for a comprehensive review of the literature on the “old” and “new” legal pluralisms, Merry, S., “Legal Pluralism” (1988) 22 Law & Society Rev. 869CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6. de Sousa Santos, B., Toward a New Common Sense: Law, Science and Politics in the Paradigmatic Transition (New York: Routledge, 1995) at 111Google Scholar.

7. For a review of the European literature, see Mertens, H.-J., “Lex Mercatoria: A Self-applying System Beyond National Law?” in Teubner, G., ed., Global Law without the State: Studies in Modern Law and Policy (Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1997) 31Google Scholar. But see also Dezalay, Y. & Garth, B., “Merchants of Law as Moral Entrepreneurs: Constructing International Justice from the Competition for Transnational Business Disputes” (1995) 29:1Law & Society Review 27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8. de Sousa Santos, supra note 6 at 365 ff.

9. See e.g. Atkinson, M. & Coleman, W., “Policy Networks, Policy Communities and the Problems of Governance” (1992) 5:2Governance 155CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Haas, P., “Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination” (1992) 46:1International Organization 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10. In general, see Bourdieu, P., “The Force of Law: Toward a Sociology of the Juridical Field” (1987) 38 Hastings L.J. 805Google Scholar; Dezalay, Y. & Sugarman, D., Professional Competition and Professional Power: Lawyers, Accountants and the Social Construction of Markets (London: Routledge, 1995)Google Scholar; Bercusson, B., “Economic Policy: State and Private Ordering” in Daintith, T., ed., Law as an Instrument of Economic Policy: Comparative and Critical Approaches (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1988) 359CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wilhelmsson, T., “Legal Integration as Disintegration of National Law” in Petersen, H. & Zahle, H., eds., Legal Polycentricity: Consequences of Pluralism in Law (Aldershot: Dartmouth, 1995) 127Google Scholar; Gill, S., “Globalization, Market Civilization, and Disciplinary Neo-Liberalism” (1995) 24:3Millennium Journal of International Studies 399CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11. de Sousa Santos, supra note 6.

12. Exports account for 40 to 45% of the Canadian GDP. According to the Historical Statistical Supplement (1995/96) Canadian Economic Observer. Amongst the G-7 countries, only Germany trades more than Canada as a percentage of its gross domestic product. See Blank, S., “The Emerging Architecture of North America” (Miami: University of Miami, 1993)Google Scholar. Over 80% of Canada's merchandise exports go to the United States; See Weintraub, S., “Current State of U.S.: Canada Economic Relations” (1994) 24:4American Review of Canadian Studies 473CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13. U.S. direct investment in Canada was about 63% of all direct foreign investment as of 1991, which represented a decline from over 85% 40 years earlier. However, it was still almost three times greater than investment from the European Union, the next largest source. Niosi, J., “Foreign Direct Investment in Canada” in Industry Canada, Multinationals in North America (Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 1994) 367Google Scholar. Overall, American-owned companies control 11.4% of the assets of Canadian companies, but 20% of the operating revenues; comparable figures for firms owned in all other foreign countries are 10% of both corporate assets and operating revenues. In other words, American-owned firms are strategically located in growing areas of the economy. 1. Fellegi, , Foreign Control in the Canadian Economy 1995, vol. 1 (Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1997)Google Scholar.

14. One study estimates that between 60 to 65% of cross-border trade by foreign-owned subsidiaries is with their parent firms. Krajewski, S., Intrafirm Trade and the New North American Business Dynamic (Ottawa: Conference Board of Canada, 1992)Google Scholar. Another study suggests that about 70% of Canada's merchandise exports to the United States are not at arm's length: about 40% are intrafirm transfers, and another 30% result from licensing and interfirm understandings. See Weintraub, supra note 12.

15. See e.g. Jenson, J., “‘Different’ But Not ‘Exceptional’: Canada's Permeable Fordism” (1989) 26:1Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 69CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jenson, J., “Mapping, Naming and Remembering: Globalization at the End of the Twentieth Century” (1991) 2:1Review of International Political Economy 96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16. Tuohy, C., Policy and Politics in Canada (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1992) at c. 8Google Scholar cites two dramatic events—the advent of free trade and the rejection of the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords—as evidence of the dysfunctionality of Canada's system of elite accommodation.

17. See Hutton, W., The State We're In (London: Jonathan Cape, 1995) at 275ffGoogle Scholar; Stallings, B. & Streeck, W., “Capitalisms in Conflict? The United States, Europe and Japan in the Post-Cold War World” in Stallings, B., ed., Global Change, Regional Response (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995) 67CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18. Porter, J., The Vertical Mosaic (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Presthus, R., Elite Accommodation in Canadian Politics (Toronto: Macmillan, 1973)Google Scholar.

19. See e.g. Bashevkin, S., “Does Public Opinion Matter? The Adoption of Federal Royal Commission and Task Force Recommendations on the National Question: 1951-1987” (1988) 31:1Canadian Public Administration 390CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Clement, W., The Canadian Corporate Elite (Toronto: McLelland & Stewart, 1975)Google Scholar; Williams, A. P. & Panitch, L., ed., The Canadian State (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977)Google Scholar; Williams, A. P., Elite Conflict and Accommodation in the Welfare State: Patterns of Contact Between Canadian State, Business and Labour Leaders (Toronto: Institute for Social Research, York University, 1987)Google Scholar.

21. This section is based on a study-in-progress of changes between 1985 and 1995 in the corporate structures of the 115 largest Canadian subsidiaries of foreign-owned transnational corporations. The study is intended for publication in Buchanan, R., Jenson, J. & de Sousa Santos, B., eds., Navigating Through Globalizations: The Challenge to Institutions [tentative title; forthcoming 1998]Google Scholar.

22. P. Muchlinski, “‘Global Bukowina’ Examined: Viewing the Multinational Enterprise as a Transnational Law-making Community” in Teubner, supra note 7, 79.

23. J.-P. Robé, “Multinational Enterprises: The Constitution of a Pluralistic Legal Order” in Teubner, ibid., 45.

24. See supra notes 12 to 14.

25. Non-resident (i.e. non-Canadian) companies may carry on business in Canada simply by registering in a Canadian jurisdiction. See e.g. Extra-Provincial Corporations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.27Google Scholar. However, a company which fails to register is “not capable of maintaining any action or proceeding … in respect of any contract made by it…” (s. 21(1).) A pending amendment appears to place “branch operations” of non-resident companies in the same position for tax purposes as subsidiaries which are incorporated in Canada. See Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.) c. 1 as am., s. 219(1), (1.1).

26. Kriger, M. & Rich, P., “Strategic Governance: Why and How MNCs are Using Boards of Directors in Foreign Subsidiaries” (1987) 22:4Colorado Journal of World Business 39Google Scholar.

27. See generally, on this development, Daniels, P. & Moulaert, F., eds., The Changing Geography of Advanced Producer Services (London & New York: Belhaven 1991)Google Scholar; UNCTAD, World Investment Report 1994: Transnational Corporations, Employment and the Workplace (New York: United Nations, 1994)Google Scholar.

28. While international investment is increasingly volatile and increasingly dominated by large institutional lenders, the Toronto Stock Exchange has so far held its own as an attractive site for global investors. Gould, D., “Big Money Goes Global” [Toronto] Globe and Mail (1 August 1995) B9Google Scholar. However, there remains a real risk that further consolidation of global markets in a few favoured sites may ultimately prejudice the position of Toronto and other Canadian markets.

29. This would appear to be part of a world-wide trend. See Mitchell, P. & Bright, J., “Multinational Headquarters Control of UK Subsidiaries' Advertising Decisions” (1995) 14 International Journal of Advertising 183CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30. For an interesting linkage between the percentage of GDP spent by various countries on R & D and their influence on scientific research based on a scientific citation index, see May, R., “The Scientific Wealth of Nations” (1997) 275 Science 793CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Canada ranks sixth amongst the G7 nations in the former category and seventh world-wide in the latter. Canada is outranked in both indicators by several small countries: Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Denmark.

31. See generally Aharoni, Y., Coalitions and Competition: The Globalization of Professional Business Services (London: Routledge, 1993)Google Scholar.

32. Industry Canada, Business Development Initiatives of Multinational Subsidiaries in Canada (Paper No. 2) by Birkinshaw, J. (Ottawa: Industry Canada, Occasional Paper Number 2, 1995)Google Scholar and “Taking the Initiative” (1995) 59:4Business Quarterly 97Google Scholar; Bristol, P., “Three Years Later: Canadian Subsidiaries Fight for a Share of the New North American Market” (1992) 52:1Food in Canada 13Google Scholar; Milner, B., “Free Trade Wave Rocks the Canadian Boat” (1994) 7 International Business 79Google Scholar.

33. Drohan, M., “What Makes a Canadian Manager?” [Toronto] Globe and Mail Report on Business (25 February 1997) B18Google Scholar; MacDonald, G., “Why U.S. Imports Get the Big Jobs” [Toronto] Globe and Mail (1 May 1997) B14Google Scholar.

34. Starr, M., “Who's the Boss? The Globalization of U.S. Employment Law” (1996) 51 Business Lawyer 635Google Scholar.

35. For recent journalistic discussion, see Blank, S., “U.S. Impressions of the Quebec Election” (1994) 3:2Canada Watch 13Google Scholar; Gillies, J. & Morra, D., “Stakeholders and Shareholders in a Global World” (1996) 17:10Policy Options 32Google Scholar; Medcalf, L., “Is Canadian Advertising on the Line?” Marketing Magazine (1 July 1996) 12Google Scholar; O'Neil, M., “Inching Toward Hegemony” (1996) Canadian Computer Reseller 14Google Scholar.

36. Belley, J.-G., “Contrat et citoyenneté: La Politique d'achat regional d'une entreprise multinationale” (1993) 34:3Cahiers de droit 1063CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Belley, J.-G., “Contract, Legal Pluralism, Global Economy and Human Development” (Toronto: Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, 1994) [unpublished]Google Scholar.

37. Of course, much will depend upon the outlook and strategy of the parent company. See Kustin, R. & Jones, R., “The Influence of Corporate Headquarters on Leadership Styles in Japanese and U.S. Subsidiary Companies” (1995) 16:5Leadership and Organization Development Journal 11CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38. Laliberté, L. “Globalisation and Canada's International Investment Position” (1993) 3:1Canadian Economic Observer 31Google Scholar; Niosi, supra note 13.

39. Grinspun, R. & Kreklewich, R., “Consolidating Neo-Liberal Reforms: ‘Free Trade’ as a Conditioning Framework” (1994) 43 Studies in Political Economy 33CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40. However, the present situation may be no more than an extrapolation of a longer trend. Over 20 years ago, a study described the CEOs of foreign-owned companies—with specified exceptions—as “surrogates, colonial administrators responsible to invisible men in a foreign land, transitory creations of offshore head offices who exercise little real clout and despite their very real collective authority figure only marginally in any audit of personal business power on the Canadian scene.” Newman, P., The Canadian Establishment, vol. 1 (Toronto: Seal, 1977) at 201–02Google Scholar.

41. Ironically, this might have the effect of diminishing their influence within the Business Council on National Issues, a lobby group on which transnationals were heavily represented, and one of the prime movers in the successful effort to persuade the Canadian government to adopt free trade policies. See O'Brien, R., “North American Integration and International Relations Theory” (1995) 28:4Canadian Journal of Political Science 693CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42. Harrington, J., “Implications of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement for Regional Provision of Producer Services” (1989) 65:4Journal of Economic Geography. 314CrossRefGoogle Scholar; François, J., “Trade in Producer Services and Returns due to Specialization under Monopolistic Competition” (1990) 23:1Canadian Journal of Economics 109CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43. K. Nicolaidis, “Mutual Recognition, Regulatory Competition and the Globalization of Professional Services” in Aharoni, supra note 31.

44. Sassen, S., Cities in a World Economy (Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge, 1994) at 119Google Scholar. See also Daniels, P., Service Industries in the World Economy (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993) c. 4 and 5Google Scholar.

45. Sassen, supra note 44 at 82–85 specifically examines the growth of the Toronto financial district, though her analysis does not take into account the deep recession which began in 1989, nor the restructuring of the Canadian economy under globalization.

46. Hutton, T. & Ley, D., “Location, Linkages and Labour: The Downtown Complex of Corporate Offices in a Medium Size City, Vancouver, British Columbia” (1987) 63 Economic Geography 126CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Michalak, W. & Fairbairn, K., “The Producer Service Complex of Edmonton: The Role and Organization of Producer Service Firms in a Peripheral City” (1993) 24 Environment and Planning 761CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

47. However, there is some suggestion that “Quebec's home-grown multinationals” may have begun to fill the void. Yakabuski, K., “Quebec Unshaken by Exodus” [Toronto] Globe and Mail (17 March 1997) B1Google Scholar.

48. Murray, V., Improving Corporate Donations: New Strategies for Grantmakers and Grantseekers (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991)Google Scholar.

49. UNCTAD, supra note 27 at c. 1, ranks three Canadian-based transnational companies as 34th, 65th and 74th amongst the largest 100 such companies; one of these is listed as “high growth,” one as “no growth” and one as “decline.” In all, the survey identifies 1396 Canadian-based transnationals amongst a world total of 37,530. The UNCTAD survey does not indicate whether some of these Canadian-based transnationals are themselves subsidiaries of foreign-based transnationals. (Financial and investment firms are not included.)

50. The pharmaceutical industry is a good example. See Anderson, M., “Collaborative Integration in the Canadian Pharmaceutical Industry” (1993) 25 Environment and Planning 1815 at 1818–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

51. See e.g. Fleming, J., “Conquering Canadians" [Toronto] Globe and Mail (15 December 1989) P30Google Scholar; Lewington, J., “Firms Going Continental Under Free Trade Pact” [Toronto] Globe and Mail (2 April 1990) B1Google Scholar; Valaskis, K., “Era of the Nomad Corporation” [Toronto] Globe and Mail (20 November 1991) A18Google Scholar.

52. See e.g. Mathews, R. & Steele, J., The Struggle for Canadian Universities (Toronto: New Press, 1969)Google Scholar; Symons, T. H. B. & Page, J. E., To Know Ourselves: Report of the Commission on Canadian Studies (Ottawa: AUCC, 1975)Google Scholar.

53. Employment and Immigration Canada, Employment Manual, s. 17.36 (Foreign Academics).

54. These measures appear to have been largely successful: in 1969–1970, Canadians held 57% of all university teaching jobs; by 1988–1989, this had risen to 81%. Statistics Canada, Teachers in Universities (Ottawa: Minister of Industry, Science and Technology, 1992)Google Scholar.

55. I do not mean to ignore the teachings of Harold Innis, which are particularly salient in any discussion of the linkages between the domestic and world economies, and between the economy and culture. See Drache, D., ed., Staples, Markets and Cultural Change: Selected Essays by Harold A. Innis (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 1995)Google Scholar. However, Innis' views are hardly dominant amongst Canadian academic economists today.

56. See generally Brooks, S. & Gagnon, A.-G., eds.. Social Scientists, Policy and the State (New York: Praeger, 1990)Google Scholar.

57. See e.g. Pross, A., “Canada in the American Arcade: Is Pluralism a Distorting Mirror?” in Douzuniskis, L., Howlett, M. & Laycock, D., Policy Studies in Canada: The State of the Art (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996) 33Google Scholar.

58. See e.g. Huwitt, P., “Twenty-Five Years of Canadian Economics” (1993) 26:1Canadian Journal of Economics 1Google Scholar. P. Fortin, “Where We Were. Where We Are: The First Eight CEA Meetings and the Last Four,” ibid. at 55, reports a discernible decline in published articles with some Canadian content (46% to 33%) and an increase towards articles which are purely theoretical. As non-academics are more likely to publish articles with Canadian empirical or policy content, amongst academic economists, the decline is even greater.

59. My preliminary analysis of teaching and scholarship in administrative and constitutional law shows that professors with graduate degrees from U.S. institutions constitute an absolute majority (about 53%) of those teaching in the field in common law schools, and an even larger proportion (about 64%) of those who have published English language books on either subject. As an interesting sidelight, there is a clear divergence between civil and common law scholars in these politically sensitive fields. U.S. graduate degrees are relatively rare in civil law schools; Canadian and French graduate degrees are equal in number (about 34%); and Canadian-trained authors contribute a disproportionate share of publications (about 43%). Conceivably, this is one source of the divergence in attitudes within legal academe towards the state, federalism, individual and collective rights etc. as between Quebec and the rest of Canada. This hypothesis gains strength to the extent that common law professors with Canadian graduate degrees training were in many cases taught by professors of an earlier generation who were themselves mostly American-trained..

60. Newman, supra note 40, Appendix C, “The Harvard Business School Clan.”

61. See e.g. Peters, B. & Savoie, D., “Reinventing Osborne and Gaebler: Lessons from the Gore Commission” (1994) 37:2Canadian Public Administration 302CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

62. Scott, A., “Does Living in Canada Make One a Canadian Economist?” (1993) 26:1Canadian Journal of Economics 26 at 37CrossRefGoogle Scholar notes that “over half of Canadian [economics] teachers and researchers were born, bred or trained outside Canada,” that a desire to maintain international mobility leads to a de-emphasis on Canadian topics, and that—while some important evidence points the other way—“it is possible that increasing international integration will make academics devote less time to hometown problems and more to the mix of economists' global preoccupations.”

63. Clarkson, S., “Economics: The New Hemispheric Fundamentalism” in Grinspun, R. & Cameron, M., The Political Economy of North American Free Trade (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 1993) 61CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

64. O'Brien, supra note 41.

65. See e.g. Bennett, C., “How States Utilize Foreign Evidence” (1991) 11:2Journal of Public Policy 31 (freedom of information legislation)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hoberg, G., “Sleeping with the Elephant: The American Influence on Canadian Environmental Regulation” (1991) 11:2Journal of Public Policy 107CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Manfredi, C., “The Use of United States Decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms” (1990) 23:3Canadian Journal of Political Science 499CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

66. See e.g. Schneiderman, D., “NAFTA's Takings Rule: American Constitutionalism Comes to Canada” (1996) 46 University of Toronto L. J. 499CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67. Cutt, J. & Dobell, R., Public Purse, Public Purpose: Autonomy and Accountability in the Groves of Academe (Halifax: Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1992)Google Scholar.

68. See e.g. Report of the Commission of Inquiry on Canadian University Education (Smith Report) (Ottawa: AUCC, 1991)Google Scholar; Report of the Task Force on University Accountability (Broadhurst Report) (Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities, 1993)Google Scholar.

69. See generally Arthurs, H. W. & Kreklewich, R., “Law, Legal Institutions and the Legal Profession in the New Economy” (1996) 34:1Osgoode Hall L. J. 1Google Scholar.

70. See generally Cain, M., “The Symbol Traders” in Cain, M. & Harrington, C., eds., Lawyers in a Postmodern World: Translation and Transgression (New York: New York University Press, 1994) 15Google Scholar.

71. Arthurs, H. W., “Legal Practise in Canada in the 21st Century” (1996) 15 Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice 202Google Scholar.

72. Trubek, D. et al. , “Global Restructuring and the Law: Studies of the Internationalization of Legal Fields and the Creation of Transnational Arenas” (1994) 44 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 407Google Scholar.

73. See e.g. Van Maanen, J., “Displacing Disney: Some Notes on the Flow of Culture” (1992) 15:1Qualitative Society 4Google Scholar. The author (mercifully) omits to mention that Disney Corp. has been hired to market one of the most quintessentially Canadian of all images: that of the R.C.M.P.

74. See Davidson, R., “Intellectual Property” in Cameron, D. & Watkins, M., eds., Canada Under Free Trade (Toronto: James Lorimer, 1993) 214Google Scholar.

75. And within Canada, Quebec is an even more special case.

76. Thompson, J., “Canada's Quest for Cultural Sovereignty: Protection, Promotion, and Popular Culture” in Randall, S. et al. , eds., North America without Borders? (Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 1992) 393Google Scholar.

77. Kresl, P., “Your Soul for a Case of Coors?: Canada-U.S. Free Trade and Canadian Culture Policy” in Kresl, P., ed., Seen from the South (Provo: Brigham Young University, 1989) 159Google Scholar; Zemans, J., “‘And the Lion Shall Lie Down with the Lamb’: U.S.-Canada Cultural Relations in a Free Trade Environment” (Winter 1994) American Review of Canadian Studies 509Google Scholar. (Readers may share my sense of irony at citing on this point two works which appear in U.S. journals.)

78. Disagreement over protection for domestic cultural industries was one of the most difficult issues to resolve during both the NAFTA negotiations and the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations. See e.g. Davies, R., “Signing Away Canada's Soul: Culture, Identity and the Free Trade Agreement” (1989) 278 Harper's Magazine 43Google Scholar; Fuller, C., “Fade to Black: Culture Under Free Trade” (August 1991) Canadian Forum 5Google Scholar; McDonald, M., “A Futile Struggle to Withstand U.S. Culture” Toronto Star (9 October 1993) C4–C6Google Scholar; Rever, J., “France Faces off with Rambo” [Toronto] Globe and Mail (4 February 1995) C9Google Scholar; Fagan, D., “Will that be Culture—or Cash?” [Toronto] Globe and Mail (29 January 1996) B1–B2Google Scholar; Fagan, D., “U.S. Takes Canada to Trade Court “[Toronto] Globe and Mail (12 March 1996) A1Google Scholar. For a technical analysis, see Appleton, B., Navigating NAFTA (Toronto: Carswell, 1994)Google Scholar.

79. Even “Canada's National Game” is becoming increasingly less Canadian. Two Canadian NHL franchises—Winnipeg and Quebec—have recently been forced by financial pressures to move to the United States; few Canadian teams are advancing into post-season play in the NHL; and few Canadians are ranked amongst its elite players.

80. See Kidd, B., “How Do We Find Our Own Voices in the ‘New World Order’? A Commentary on Americanization” (1991) 8 Sociology of Sport Journal 178CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Harvey, J. & Houle, F., “Sport, World Economy, Global Culture and New Social Movements” (1994) 11 Sociology of Sport Journal 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

81. See e.g. Audley, P., “Cultural Industries Policy: Objectives, Formulation, and Evaluation” (1994) 19 Canadian Journal of Communication 317CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

82. See e.g. Bergman, B., “Publish and Perish” 107 Maclean's Magazine (17 October 1994)50Google Scholar.

83. See e.g. Stoffman, J., “U.S. Scholar Will Head AGO” Toronto Star (27 May 1995) A3Google Scholar; Mays, J. B., “Misplaced Cosmopolitanism at the AGO” [Toronto] Globe and Mail (3 June 1995) C 15Google Scholar; Riley, S, “Must We Surrender Even our Galleries?” Toronto Star (3 June 1995) J8Google Scholar.

84. See generally Lorimer, R. & Duxbury, N., “Of Culture, the Economy, Cultural Production and Cultural Producers: An Orientation” (1994) 19 Canadian Journal of Communication 259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

85. See Arthurs, H., “Mechanical Arts and Merchandise: Canadian Public Administration in the New Economy” (1997) 42:1McGill L. J. 29Google Scholar.

86. For several recent social democratic critiques, with proposed strategies to respond to globalization and continental economic integration, see Grinspun & Cameron, supra note 63.

87. Most notoriously in Ontario, see City of Toronto Act, S.O. 1997, c. 2Google Scholar (amalgamating the six constituent municipalities of Metropolitan Toronto); Fewer School Boards Act, S.O. 1997, c. 3Google Scholar (reducing the number of local school boards, and bringing educational policy and expenditure more closely under control of the provincial Ministry of Education and Training).

88. The Ontario government recently announced that it would eliminate 22—and possibly 34—of its 50 advisory agencies (including the Law Reform Commission, the Women's Directorate, the Anti-racism Directorate and the Council on University Affairs) in response to the recommendations of its Task Force on Agencies, Boards and Commissions chaired by Robert Wood, Parliamentary Assistant to the Chair of Management Board of Cabinet. According to Hon. David Johnson (Chair of Management Board of Cabinet): “As this government has said many times, in an environment of restructuring and cost reduction you've got to find new ways to do business. The same is true for our advisory agencies. Whenever possible, government will seek advice through volunteers and less formal processes. Where formal advisory agencies continue to be used as a method of consultation or advice, government will look for qualified people who are willing to serve on a voluntary business.” Ontario, Official Report of Debates (29 May 1996) at 3146Google Scholar.

89. de Sousa Santos, supra note 6.