THE PARLIAMENTS OF CANADA AND PAKISTAN: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF STRENGTHS AND WEAK
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to make a deeper analysis of the parliament of Canada and Pakistan. This research deals with comparing two similar parliamentary systems. The two countries, i.e. Canada and Pakistan were chosen because of their majority electoral system and to a lesser extent, alike political trends. This research analyzed the weaknesses and strengths of both the legislative systems. Method: Data related to this topic has been collected from secondary sources such as reports, journal articles, and books. This research work is analytical as well as descriptive in nature. Qualitative techniques have been applied to investigate the research questions. Main Findings: This study acknowledges that the parliamentary form of government is the most representative and most efficient system of government that is running successfully in different countries. Parliament safeguards the political views of the citizens and thus provides them with all possible opportunities for more participation in the government. It creates a cohesive and strong party system. The main finding to be acquired from this study is that one problem that is common to both nations is provincial imbalance. However, overall it can be said that Canada has accommodated its provinces effectively through its responsible government, democratic system, and granting maximum autonomy. Another factor that is a major problem in Pakistan but not so in Canada is the branches of government overstepping their jurisdiction. Application of the Study: Using the yardstick of the function of legislation and making comparative references with other political systems was very useful in summarizing this research. Whatever weaknesses and criticisms may be discussed the overall fact is that the job done by these parliaments is undoubtedly necessary and useful and it is hoped this study may serve as a guideline for future parliaments to make them more efficient. The Originality of the Study: This research argues that a parliamentary system is a more desirable and efficient system of government than others. This research explains the differences between both these systems. Both the houses of these parliaments provide separate services that require separate investigation and throw further light on the subject.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».