MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dismembering Canada? Stephen Harper and the foreign relations of canadian provinces

2009· article· en· W21238772 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christopher J. Kukucha

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d'études constitutionnelles · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Massachusetts Dartmouth
KeywordsFederalismNegotiationDelegationAutonomyPolitical scienceDecentralizationCooperative federalismForeign policyPublic administrationGovernment (linguistics)Power (physics)Political economySociologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stephen Harper’s minority Conservative government has allegedly pursued a decentralized vision of Canadian federalism. This vision includes pledges to limit the federal spending power and the declaration of Quebec as a “nation.” Controversially, this commitment has also extended to the foreign relations of Canadian provinces.Quebec recently negotiated a bilateral labour mobility agreement with France and was also granted formal standing in Canada’s delegation at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Ottawa has also promised to support an autonomous subfederal role in trade promotion and the negotiation of international economic agreements. This study will argue, however, that Canadian provinces have exercised partial and significant autonomy in terms of foreign offices, trade policy, cross-border functional relations, development assistance, and the environment, long before the arrival of Harper and the Conservatives. In fact, this policy capacity is due to long-term trends related to the intrusiveness of international trade agreements, federalism’s response to these pressures, and the ongoing decentralization of federal-provincial relations in Canada.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d'études constitutionnellesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207