Canada, human rights, and the future of the liberal international order
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human rights—specifically international human rights law—have been central to the success of the liberal international order. But since the founding of the United Nations (UN), Canada has had a complicated relationship with international human rights law. This article provides a survey of sixty years of Canadian human rights diplomacy at the UN Commission on Human Rights, from its establishment in 1946 to its dissolution in 2006. During this period, there were moments when Canada did champion new international law, and did so courageously. Yet there were others, such as during negotiations to recognize and codify the rights of Indigenous peoples, when it stood in the way of progress. But the international order that has served Canada so well since the end of the Second World War is under threat, due to a combination of shifts in the global balance of power, and critical challenges such as climate change. If it is to survive into the twenty-first century, advanced democracies such as Canada will need to lead in the development and enforcement of international human rights law, a role that governments in Ottawa have at various times been reluctant to play.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".