MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012203602 · doi:10.3828/bjcs.18.2.1

Introduction: Scotland and Québec: An evolving comparison

2005· article· en· W2012203602 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ailsa Henderson, Colin M. Coates

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Canadian Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferendumNationalismPoliticsPopulationDemocracyPolitical scienceState (computer science)Home ruleImmigrationGovernment (linguistics)Political economyGenealogyLawSociologyHistoryDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scotland and Quebec share many features. Both are nations within larger states, strongly identified by their distinctive institutions and traditions. Both have experienced some three decades of constitutional debate, animated most recently by social democratic nationalist parties. Moreover, their shared historical connection to the British Empire has created many demographic links and institutional similarities. The rise of nationalism at the ballot box in the 1970s, not to mention the referendums on measures of self-government, make comparisons between the two convenient. In contemporary academic parlance, they both have become exemplars, along with Catalonia, of the 'stateless nation', although as Quebecois scholars point out, the extensive powers wielded by the province give it a presence as a 'state'. It is also easy to highlight differences between the two nations. Quebec has twice the population of Scotland, and is host to visible minority and immigrant communities that are much larger than in Scotland. Quebec is often seen as an example of ethnic nationalism, prioritising birth and language, while Scottish nationalism is often associated with civic markers such as political values and residency. Academics are not the only ones to make comparisons between the two nations. Politicians and journalists in both places have used the other to prove a point. For instance, in September 2002, the First Minister of Scotland, Jack McConnell, used the occasion of the annual British Labour Party meeting to make such a comparison. He criticised the Scottish National Party (SNP) plan to hold a referendum on the constitutional future of Scotland by referring to economic difficulties in Quebec at the time of the 1995 referendum.1 Similarly, extensive Quebecois media interest accompanied the referendum for a Scottish Parliament in 1997. The comparison between Scotland and Quebec provides both positive and negative fodder for political discussions. For nationalists in Scotland, Quebec provides a positive example of a nation largely controlling its culture and economy. Quebec's ability to control such diverse policy areas as pensions and education proves that nations within states can exercise substantial jurisdictions. For Quebec nationalists, Scotland serves as an example of a broadly recognised nation. Long before the establishment of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, the United Kingdom provided clear political acknowledgement of Scotland's distinctiveness: a separate question time at Westminister for Scottish issues, a separate bureaucracy north of the border, and dedicated ministers within the Scottish Office. Such acceptance of Scotland's status as a nation contrasts markedly with the painful and drawn-out debate in Canada over the recognition of Quebec as a 'distinct society' in constitutional terms. In Scotland, more of the political debate has focused on the nature of political reform and less on whether the Scots exist as 'a people'. Even for some federalists in Canada, the creation of the Scottish Parliament has served as evidence that British attempts at devolution mimic the effectiveness of current Canadian constitutional arrangements. As a corollary, these federalists would contend, advocates of a greater degree of sovereignty in Quebec should instead be happy with the constitutional status quo. Clearly, comparison of the two 'stateless nations' can serve many purposes. Historical parallels As many of the chapters in this book contend, the histories of Scotland and Quebec run parallel in many places. Both Scotland and Quebec experienced integration into the British Empire in the eighteenth century, Scotland through the Act of Union of 1707 that saw the disappearance of the local parliament and Quebec through the Conquest of 1759-60. The histories of the two regions come together in the person of James Wolfe. Aide-de-camp to Lieutenant-General Henry Hawley at the defeat of the Jacobite army at Culloden in 1746, Wolfe was the general commanding British forces (including erstwhile Jacobites) at Quebec in 1759. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Canadian StudiesSame topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207