New Immigrants Seeking New Places: The Role of Policy Changes in the Regional Distribution of New Immigrants to <scp>C</scp>anada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Canada, the U.S., and Australia have recently experienced an increased regional dispersion of entering immigrants. American research suggests that a mixture of economic push factors (away from states like California) and pull factors (toward states with growth of low‐wage jobs) and changing government policies and regulations contributed to the development of the New Gateways. Very few studies have been conducted to determine why the regional dispersion of entering immigrants occurred in Canada. This paper assesses the extent to which changes in immigration selection programs, notably, the Provincial Nominee Programs, contributed to the regional dispersion of entering immigrants. Using data from immigrant landing records, this study shows that different factors accounted for changes in the share of immigrants settling in different destinations. Changes in immigration selection programs played the primary role in the increasing numbers going to Saskatchewan and Manitoba, although improving economic conditions may have played an indirect role. Shifts in immigrant source regions were an important factor in the decrease in immigration to Toronto and in the increase to Montréal. Economic conditions likely played a significant role in the changes in the shares of new immigrants going to Toronto, Montréal, Calgary, and Edmonton.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it