The Future for Human Security in Canada: Evaluating 'Change' in Foreign Policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No accessJournal of Human SecurityOther Journal Article01 January 2009The Future for Human Security in Canada: Evaluating 'Change' in Foreign Policy Authors: George A MacLean Authors: George A MacLean Professor and Head, Department of Political Studies, 531 Fletcher Argue, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada, email: [email protected], tel: +1 204.474-6621, fax. +1 204.474-7585 Google Scholar More articles by this author SectionsAboutPDF/EPUBExport CitationsAdd to FavouriteAdd to FavouriteCreate a New ListNameCancelCreate ToolsTrack CitationsCreate Clip ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInEmail Abstract In the Canadian context, human security descended from a grand design of foreign policy premised on national values and interests, and an internationalist approach. However, human security became immersed in an unnecessary struggle to distinguish a new 'paradigm', alienating many who may otherwise have come to see the term as useful and constructive. It became a polarising theme in Canadian foreign policy as the government presented it as a novel approach, rather than one grounded firmly in the strategy of Canada's foreign relations. Despite the ensuing controversy over its use, and the current Conservative government's attempt to set itself apart from the Liberal legacy, the human security agenda remains largely intact, though without explicit reference to the term. Full Text DOI Previous article Next article RelatedDetails View PUBLICATION DETAILSDate of Publication:January 2009Journal:Journal of Human SecurityISSN:1835-3800Volume:5Issue:3Page Range:58-71First Page:58Last Page:71Source:Journal of Human Security, Vol. 5, No. 3, 2009: 58-71Date Last Modified:05 September 2018 12:24Date Last Revised:06 October 2012Geographic LocationCanadaSubjectPolitical scienceInternational relationsInternationalismNational securitySecurity, InternationalAxworthy, LloydCase studiesInternational relations--Moral and ethical aspects METRICS Downloaded 0 times Copyright© Human Security Institute, 2009Download PDFLoading ...
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".