Canada as an “importer” and as an “exporter” of federal arrangements: A view from Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article explores the main features of Canadian federalism from a European perspective, looking at Canada as an “importer” and an “exporter” of federal solutions. First, it considers the relationship between federalism and constitutional amendment formulas. Second, it analyses the division of competences between the federation and the provinces under the Constitution Act and the case law of the Supreme Court of Canada. Third, the article deals with the composition and powers of the Senate as a problematic element for the functioning of the federation. Fourth, it moves on to explore intergovernmental relationships as a key element of the Canadian asymmetric federal arrangement. Finally, it reconstructs and elaborates on the failed attempts of Quebec to secede and how the threat of federal disintegration has been addressed. The article concludes that, despite having been “obscured” by other federations, like the United States and Germany, as a benchmark for federal solutions, Canada has become an increasingly popular federal model and shows features and challenges similar to some regional and federal countries in the old continent, when viewed through the lens of a European observer.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".