Settlement and Integration Policies in Federal Contexts: The Case of Refugees in Canada and Brazil
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 The scholarly literature highlights that refugees face barriers accessing public services due to cultural, language and communication differences, financial constraints and lack of information, which can be reinforced by variations in service coverage and provision, especially in low- and middle-income countries, and complex intergovernmental relations and governance arrangements, common in federal systems. This article seeks to analyse Brazil and Canada to understand the implications of intergovernmental relations, particularly the role of local governments in settlement and integration policies. The analysis of documents and in-depth interviews highlights that, although Canada is highly decentralized, the federal government has a stronger role in guaranteeing equal access to services than in Brazil. Nevertheless, the lack of coordination among governments in both countries reinforces certain barriers, which have been overcome by an increasing role of municipalities and local actors in this policy field.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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