Migration Theories and First Nations Mobility: Towards a Systems Perspective*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au Canada, la recherche sur la migration des autochtones vers les centres urbains a mis en avant l'importance de facteurs économiques, les mou‐vements de retour étant expliqués comme un échec lié aux difficultés d'adaptation. Les facteurs sous‐tendant la migration vers les villes ont été peu étudiés, et des études récentes ont mis l'accent sur l'ampleur des mouvements plutôt que sur d'autres théories. Cet article suggère des voies selon lesquelles on peut avoir recours à une approche systémique pour intégrer des facteurs des contextes politique, économique et social ainsi que des liens individuels, institutionnels et de culture de masse. The migration of Canadian Aboriginal people to cities has usually been understood as economically motivated, with return migration to Aboriginal communities resulting primarily from failure to adapt to urban life. However, the reasons underlying migration have rarely been directly addressed, and recent studies of migration have focussed on the size of flows, rather than relating this migration stream to theories of migration developed in other contexts. This paper suggests ways in which a systems perspective on migration can be used to incorporate elements of the political, economic and social context, as well as individual, institutional and mass culture links between the two areas.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".