Réflexions sur la nécessité d'une loi imposant l'analyse comparative entre les sexes au Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé.LaCharte canadienne des droits et libertésenchâsse le droit à l'égalité pour les femmes. De plus, le Canada est signataire de laConvention sur l'élimination de toutes les formes de discrimination à l'égard des femmesdepuis 1981. Les Canadiennes sont donc en mesure de s'attendre à ce que le gouvernement fédéral respecte ses engagements à l'égard de l'égalité des femmes dans ses programmes, ses mesures, ses politiques ou ses lois. Pourtant, tel n'est pas toujours le cas. Comme le démontrent les statistiques récentes, les Canadiennes n'ont pas atteint l'égalité réelle. Une analyse des effets des mesures gouvernementales fédérales sur les femmes est rarement menée, malgré l'existence officielle de programmes d'analyse comparative entre les sexes (ACS) depuis 1995. Les mesures volontaires en matière d'ACS ne mènent pas loin. Comment forcer le gouvernement fédéral à respecter ses propres engagements internationaux et constitutionnels envers l'égalité pour les femmes? Après un rappel du sens à donner aux concepts d'égalité et d'analyse comparative entre les sexes (ACS), nous abordons une des conclusions du Rapport du Groupe d'expertes sur les mécanismes de responsabilisation pour l'égalité entre les sexes,L'égalité pour les femmes : au-delà de l'illusion, soit l'adoption d'une loi portant sur l'égalité pour les femmes et imposant de façon systématique l'ACS dans l'appareil gouvernemental fédéral canadien. Abstract.TheCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedomsprotects women's rights to equality. Canada has also signed theConvention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Womenin 1981. As such, Canadian women have good reason to expect that the federal government will honour its commitments towards women's rights to equality in all its programs, measures, policies and laws. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. As shown by recent statistics, Canadian women have not achieved substantive equality. Gender-based analyses are rarely conducted, in spite of the official existence of the gender-based analysis (GBA) program since 1995. Voluntary measures in GBA do not go far enough. How can the federal government be forced to honour its constitutional and international obligations towards women's equality? After defining the concepts of equality and GBA, this article analyzes one of the recommendations of the Report of the Expert Panel on Accountability Mechanisms for Gender Equality,Equality for Women : Beyond the Illusion, namely the enactment of a law on equality for women, making GBA compulsory in all Canadian federal endeavours.
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 | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".