Autonomy, Subsidiarity, Solidarity: Foundations of Cooperative Federalism
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
What does the constitutional principle of federalism entail? Instead of a detailed set of specific rules, the principle of federalism relies on a series of principles that distinguish federations from other political forms. The author proposes that three such principles stand out from within our constitutional instruments and jurisprudence: autonomy, subsidiarity and federal solidarity. The combination of these three interrelated constitutional principles forms the normative structure that gives Canadian federalism its internal logic. And it is the author's contention that this internal logic is one of cooperative federalism. It is these principles that must guide the judiciary when it fulfills its special duty as "guardian of the Constitution", and as such, as guardian of the principle of federalism. Indeed, each of the three principles -- autonomy, subsidiarity and federal solidarity -- offers its own normative justification for cooperative federalism. First, cooperative federalism is justified as a means to optimise the constitutionally guaranteed autonomy of each partner in the federation. It does so by optimising the capacity of federal partners to effectively manage complex issues, while, at the same time, protecting their respective exclusive jurisdictions. Second, the constitutional principle of subsidiarity entails that powers were not divided at random between federal partners. Rather, they are distributed according to the principles of proximity (geographical or otherwise) and, in case of incapacity, to a subsidiary institution. A relation of subsidiarity is, among other things, one in which the principal is meant to be assisted or helped by a subsidiary power. It would thus be antithetical to the principle of subsidiarity for a subsidiary agent to seek to hinder the capacity of the principal to achieve its legitimate goals. The principle of subsidiarity thus provides a normative justification for the constitutional requirement of cooperation between central authorities and provinces. Third, despite their respective autonomy, the federal government and the provinces are joined together not only by constitutional rules, but also by a shared citizenry towards whom they have obligations. The nested political identities of the citizenry in a federation are institutionally reflected in the fact that each level of government is separate, yet participate in a common body politic. Thus, partners in a federation cannot treat each other as if they were foreign, independent states whose actions do not have direct consequences on their own citizenry. Hurting federal partners amounts to hurting the shared body politic. The principle of federal solidarity thus creates certain positive duties of assistance, and certain prohibitions against imposing certain negative externalities on other federal partners. Cooperative federalism is thus normatively justified by the need for each level of government to protect and promote the interests of a shared citizenry forming a common body politic.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,026 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».