Au-delà des droits linguistiques et du fédéralisme classique: favoriser l’autonomie institutionnelle des francophonies minoritaires du Canada (Beyond Linguistic Rights and Classical Federalism: Institutional Autonomy for French-Speakers Outside Québec in Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Dans cet article, l’auteure examine differentes formules d’amenagements institutionnels visant a favoriser l’autonomie des Francophones en milieu minoritaire (FMM) ou meme de construire un espace politique francophone a l’echelle du Canada. Evaluant les consequences de l’architecture federale sur les FMM, l’auteure suggere que le federalisme canadien reflete peu la dualite linguistique canadienne et ne favorise pas un epanouissement egalitaire des minorites francophones a travers le pays. Malgre la position ambigue des minorites francophones hors Quebec dans la typologie de Kymlicka relative aux groupes minoritaires, des amenagements institutionnels peuvent etre revendiques par les FMM afin de consolider leur statut et leur resistance aux pressions assimilatrices. Par ailleurs, le droit international offre une panoplie d’instruments pour favoriser la participation effective et l’integration des minorites dans la vie publique. Ces instruments sont rarement juridiquement contraignants. Ils influencent neanmoins le Canada qui se considere souvent comme un modele de promotion du droit des minorites. Enfin, l’auteure propose un eventail de solutions – territoriales, non-territoriales ou mixtes – qui pourraient favoriser l’autonomie et la participation politique des FMM. L’auteure soutient qu’en s’ouvrant au droit institutionnel, les FMM pourront se « penser » comme des acteurs etatiques, et non seulement comme des interlocuteurs d’un Etat qui lui confere une « protection ». En concevant les FMM de cette facon, la francophonie canadienne serait consideree comme une veritable entite politique. English Abstract: This article considers the vast array of potential institutional arrangements available to Francophone minority communities (FMC) in order to foster their autonomy, or to create a Francophone political space across the country. In the first part, the author evaluates the consequences of the current federalist architecture on FMC, and concludes that Canadian federalism does not reflect the linguistic duality of the country. Federalism does not succeed in developing and maintaining the vitality of the Francophone communities throughout the country. Moreover, despite the ambiguous position of FMC in Kymlicka’s minorities classification, the author contends that FMC should be able to claim institutional arrangements to strengthen their status and to resist assimilation. The second part contends that public international law offers a plethora of treaties, conventions and non-binding instruments to advance minorities’ participation and integration into the societies they inhabit. As a country priding itself in the way it promotes minority rights, Canada has generally been influenced by these norms. In the last part, the author surveys a number of territorial, non-territorial or mixed solutions available to FMC. She maintains that FMC should “think” of themselves as state actors, and not merely as interlocutors with a State which offers them “protection”. By conceptualizing FMC in this manner, the Canadian “francophonie” becomes a true political entity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".