MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2190918550

Bordering on Failure: Canada-U.S. Border Policy and the Politics of Refugee Exclusion

2013· article· en· W2190918550 on OpenAlexaffabout
Efrat Arbel, Alletta Brenner

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeePolitical scienceComprehensive Plan of ActionGenerosityGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsRefugee lawLawPublic administration
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In June 2012, the Canadian government ushered in sweeping reforms to Canada’s refugee system. These reforms brought debates about Canadian refugee protection to the forefront of legal and political discourse. In advancing these reforms, the Canadian government has asserted that Canada’s refugee system is among the most generous and compassionate in the world. Canada’s doors, the Canadian government has stated, remain open to legitimate refugees. This report evaluates these claims by examining the U.S.-Canada Safe Third Country Agreement and border measures implemented under the rubric of the Multiple Borders Strategy, and analyzing their effects on asylum seekers. A detailed examination of these measures is necessary to evaluate the generosity of Canada’s refugee system, and to accurately frame debates about Canadian refugee protection. This report concludes that through the Safe Third Country Agreement and the Multiple Borders Strategy, Canada is systematically closing its borders to asylum seekers, and circumventing its refugee protection obligations under domestic and international law. While Canada has a valid interest in regulating its borders to ensure refugee protection is reserved only for genuine refugees, neither the Safe Third Country Agreement nor the Multiple Borders Strategy effectively serve this interest. Instead, these measures deter, deflect, and block asylum seekers from lawfully making refugee claims in Canada in arbitrary and unprincipled ways, and do not effectively serve the goal of protecting the integrity of the Canada-U.S. border. Examining these measures, this report finds: 1. Canada is systematically closing its borders to asylum seekers and avoiding its refugee protection obligations under domestic and international law; 2. Through the Safe Third Country Agreement, Canada jeopardizes asylum seekers’ ability to obtain fundamental legal protections by returning them to the United States despite clear deficiencies in the U.S. asylum system; 3. The Safe Third Country Agreement has prompted a rise in human smuggling across the Canada-U.S. border, making the border more dangerous and disorderly, and raising security concerns for Canada and the United States.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0620.023
Scholarly communication0.0180.004
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations33
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207