MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143042951 · doi:10.1017/s0008423913000164

“Just Do It!”: Carving Out a Space for the Métis in Canadian Federalism

2013· article· en· W2143042951 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janique Dubois, Kelly Saunders

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsBrandon UniversityBrock University
FundersMinistry of Economy, Trade and IndustryAustralian Government
KeywordsFederalismPolitical scienceProclamationNew FederalismHumanitiesConstitutionPoliticsDual federalismPower (physics)Public administrationLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 theConstitution Act 1867divides 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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0490.038
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political ScienceSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207