Indigenous Peoples and Neoliberal “Privatization” in Canada: Opportunities, Cautions and Constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.This article addresses the impact of the current neoliberal political context for Indigenous governance in Canada. While some observers have argued correctly that the neoliberal context provides new opportunities or points of entry in the political opportunity structure for “self-government” initiatives (Helvin, 2006; Scott, 2006; Slowey, 2008), I examine to what extent recent decentralizing initiatives, generally viewed as “concessions” made by the state to meet the demands of Indigenous peoples, must be evaluated as part of a broader governmental strategy of neoliberalism. This strategy is not simply about meeting the demands of Indigenous peoples but also about meeting the requirements of the contemporary governmental shift towards “privatization” within liberal democratic states. As such, I argue that certain manifestations of Indigenous self-government are vulnerable to criticisms launched against practices of privatization, practices which include a variety of policies designed to promote a shifting of contentious issues out of the public sphere and thereby limiting public debate and collective—that is, state—responsibility. Résumé.Le présent article analyse d'un oeil critique l'impact du contexte politique néolibéral actuel sur la gouvernance autochtone au Canada. Certains auteurs ont avancé avec raison que le contexte néolibéral donnait aux peuples autochtones de nouveaux points d'entrée pour leurs initiatives d'autogouvernance (Helvin, 2006; Scott, 2006; Slowey, 2008). Toutefois, j'examine ici dans quelle mesure les tentatives récentes de décentralisation, souvent comprises comme des «concessions» faites par l'État pour répondre aux revendications des peuples autochtones, doivent être évaluées dans le cadre plus vaste d'une stratégie de néolibéralisme du gouvernement. Cette stratégie ne vise pas uniquement à répondre aux besoins des peuples autochtones, mais aussi à permettre au gouvernement de s'orienter vers la «privatisation» qui distingue l'État libéral démocratique contemporain. À ce titre, je soutiens que certaines manifestations d'autogouvernance des Autochtones peuvent se prêter aux mêmes critiques que les pratiques de privatisation, qui comprennent diverses politiques visant à retirer de la place publique certains sujets controversés afin de limiter le débat public et la responsabilité collective, c'est-à-dire celle de l'État.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".