Provincial Involvement in Canadian Immigration Policy Making: The Case of Ontario
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
Asymmetry and executive federalism are two unique features that dominate the Canadian political landscape. As a result, federal and provincial governments are in direct negotiations over many current public policy issues, immigration policy notwithstanding. In order to understand the current immigration debate and to evaluate the benefits of greater provincial involvement, it is first necessary to comprehend what motivates provinces to be active in immigration policy-making. Ontario presents an interesting example of a province that used to be quite content with leaving the federal government dominant in the immigration arena but that has recently changed its attitude completely: Ontario is now much more assertive in presenting its demands. Through a comprehensive literature review and a series of interviews of key immigration policy figures, this study analyzes the main motives of Ontario with respect to immigration policy. It finds that they were primarily of economic, demographic, and political nature and that they were mainly connected to the relative decline of Ontario's position within Canada.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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