Canadian Refugee Policy Paradigm Change in the 1990s: Understanding the Power of International Social Influence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation explores the factors which contributed to a change in the paradigm that framed Canadian refugee policy over the course of the 1990s. This change is characterized in the dissertation as a shift from a refugee protection paradigm that dominated policy-makers’ thinking in the 1970s and 1980s, to a security-control paradigm by at the end of the 1990s. This change is puzzling because it occurred prior to the events of 9/11 rather than in response to them and because domestic motivations for change do not provide a complete explanation of the shift. The dissertation argues that although factors in the domestic and international environments may have enabled paradigm change, a more complete explanation of shift needs to consider the process through which Canadian policy-makers were socialized into a developing international norm. This process of international socialization occurred through bureaucrats’ international interaction in bilateral and Regional Consultative Processes akin to Anne-Marie Slaughter’s global government networks. Using data generated from primary document analysis and a series of interviews of key policy-makers this dissertation maps paradigm change over the two periods. This data is then used to provide evidence of the importance of bureaucratic socialization through a global government network for migration in explaining this change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".