“Just Do It!”: Carving Out a Space for the Métis in Canadian Federalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Disagreement over how and between whom power should be shared has led to competing conceptions of federalism in Canada. The model of federalism adopted in the Constitution Act 1867 divides power between the provinces and the federal government to the exclusion of Aboriginal peoples. However, pre-Confederation documents such as the Royal Proclamation of 1763 and the early treaties suggest that federalism is founded on the coexistence of self-governing nations. This paper presents a case study of how one Aboriginal people, the Métis, are reviving the pre-Confederation vision of federalism founded on mutual recognition by carving out a space for themselves in Canada's political and institutional landscape. We argue that by delivering an expanded array of programs and services to their citizens, creating innovative governance structures, adopting legislation in key areas of Métis interest and fostering economic self-sufficiency, the Métis are reshaping federalism from the bottom up. Résumé. Deux visions antagoniques du fédéralisme canadien existent en raison de conceptions divergentes de la séparation des pouvoirs. Le modèle de fédéralisme adopté par la Loi constitutionnelle de 1867 divise les pouvoirs entre les provinces et le gouvernement fédéral, en dépit des peuples autochtones. Or, la Proclamation royale de 1763 et les premiers traités proposent une vision du fédéralisme fondée sur la coexistence de nations autonomes. Cet article présente une étude de cas qui démontre comment un peuple autochtone, les Métis, fait renaitre la vision originale du fédéralisme fondée sur la reconnaissance mutuelle en se taillant une place au sein du paysage politique et institutionnel canadien. Les Métis prennent une approche ascendante pour façonner le fédéralisme canadien à cette image par le biais du développement de programmes et services, la création de structures de gouvernance innovatrices, l'adoption de politiques dans des domaines clés et la poursuite de l'autosuffisance économique.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".