MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984195301 · doi:10.1017/s000842391100014x

Indigenous Peoples and Neoliberal “Privatization” in Canada: Opportunities, Cautions and Constraints

2011· article· en· W1984195301 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPolitical scienceContext (archaeology)PoliticsNeoliberalism (international relations)State (computer science)Public administrationIndigenous rightsGovernment (linguistics)Corporate governanceDemocracyPolitical economySociologyLawGeographyManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it