Assessing public confidence in Canada's new approach to border security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and subsequent global ‘War on Terror’, on December 12th, 2003 Canada consolidated its customs, immigration, and food inspection services into the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA). This paper examines how the establishment of the CBSA, along with other North American post‐9/11 security reforms, have impacted Canada. After presenting a historic account of North America's border services, we present the results of a national‐based public survey of Canadians on how post 9–11 reforms have impacted the public's confidence in their governments’ ability to address trans‐border crime and threat of terrorism. Overall, the results show that while Canadians appear undecided about their nation's level of border security, they are not overly confident about the government's ability to address the threat of trans‐border crime and terrorism. Using a peacemaking perspective, we conclude by discussing several key criticisms of recent national security reforms and explore how these reforms are impacting established social, economic, and political freedoms.
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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".