The Arctic Linked to the Emerging Dominant Ideas in Canada's Foreign and Defence Policy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From an international security studies perspective, this article offers a discourse analysis of Canada’s threat perceptions and security rhetoric in the Arctic between December 2005 and March 2009. It argues that since December 2005, the government of Canada has decided to securitize its political sovereignty, its northern identity, as well as its territorial integrity. The author offers a cultural explanation to these securitizations by arguing that Canada’s strategic changes in the Arctic are a lot more than just rhetoric; they seem to be linked to the emerging dominant ideas in Canada’s foreign and defence policy—hence, a phasing out of Canada’s traditional internationalism and middle power status and a phasing in of the ideas tied to continentalism and to major power status. After linking the Arctic to Canada’s place and role in the world, the author discusses the possible negative and positive effects of these processes of securitization. He then concludes the article by offering two specific recommendations to better Canada’s role in the Circumpolar World.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it