Canadian Party Politics in the 2000s: A Re-examination of the Regionalization Thesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the 1990s scholars of party politics have written of the increasing regionalization of Canadian party politics, going as far as to label the current system 'balkanized'. Using three widely established measures of party nationalization (party coverage, uniformity of support, and patterns of electoral competition), and one new measure (analysis of party advertisements), this paper explores the regionalization thesis in the post 1990s political landscape. While there is widespread consensus in the literature that the Canadian party system is highly regionalized, this paper provides evidence to the contrary. Rather than a balkanization of Canadian electoral and party politics we are witnessing a re-nationalization of Canadian party politics. This is especially true for those parties that compete in English Canada. Where regionalization does still exist is in the province of Quebec. Not only does the Bloc Quebecois represent a regionalizing force in itself, but the party's very presence alters the strategies of the other parties that compete in Quebec. As a result of the different dynamics of party competition in Quebec, we are left with two distinct party systems: a regional party system in Quebec and a national party system in the rest of 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 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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".