Multinational Democracy and Political Recognition in Spain, 1978-2010
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this dissertation I attempt to build a bridge between normative discussions about multinational democracy and political recognition, and a contextually-sensitive empirical analysis of the Spanish case. I argue that, by looking at the characteristics and political dynamic of Catalonia, the Basque Country and Galicia, we can gain a better understanding of the definition, composition and viability of a multinational democracy.\nCombining normative discussions and a description of an empirical case (Spain) I seek to bridge both normative and empirical literatures about political recognition and multinationality highlighting the fruitful interconnections between them. In doing so, I attempt to provide adequate tools to normatively assess concrete and actual processes of political recognition in a context-sensitive manner.\nThe dissertation also emphasises the possibilities (and limits) of federalism as a viable political and institutional framework to accommodate multinational demands in a democratic fashion. By looking at the Spanish case and the controversies and challenges that Catalonia, the Basque Country and Galicia present, I believe I offer a better understanding of political recognition. I defend a view of democracy and politics that is open by definition and is amenable to contestation and ongoing negotiations. I contend that the temptation to arrive at a solution as if it were a final and permanent state of affairs should be avoided; rather, the indeterminate and open-ended nature of the processes analysed should be not only tolerated but rather assessed according to the conditions and dynamic of the process of political recognition identified and discussed in my dissertation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".