State-led Forced Migration in the Canadian Context: A Look into Canada’s Deportation Flights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis contributes to existing literature on deportation in Canada byproviding a viapolitical analysis of how removals are realized in the settler-colonial Canadian context.Using empirical evidence obtained through access to information requests, media sources, activists and from select corporate documents produced by the Canada Border Services Agency and other actors, I argue that the wide-scale incorporation of airplane technology in contemporary deportation regimes has fundamentally reconfigured the way in which present-day expulsions are realized with the effect of partially sanitizing and legitimizing what was once considered a severe, often lethal penal practice comparable to the death penalty.For this reason, it can be said that seemingly benign aircrafts not only facilitate regular migration flows, they also double as politically-charged sites implicated in the violence of coercive expulsion.While the majority of removal practices are commonly, if only tacitly, accepted by the general public, others challenge the assumption that states always abide by the law.The normalization of 'air deportation' has also led to the emergence of new actors in removal operations: some are unwilling participants while others are driven by profit-incentives, enabling us to speak of the emergence of a distinct Canadian 'migration control industry' profiting from the business of air deportation.Migrants, their allies and a number of other affected actors have nonetheless developed innovative tactics to resist and dialectically reshape contemporary expulsions.Many of these acts of contestation target the very specificities and vulnerabilities of the deportation flight.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".