Mobilizing diaspora during crisis: Ukrainian diaspora in Canada and the intergenerational sweet spot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada’s Ukrainian diaspora occupy an enviable, if not rare, ‘intergenerational sweet spot’. This sweet spot endows them with a high degree of positionality within Canada, enabling both long and short-term support for Ukraine since the crisis began in 2014. In examining Ukrainian diaspora positionality in the Canadian context, we find there are varied strategies that help offset hardship at the community and household level while addressing the long-term fragility of the country. While new migrants and temporary workers are actively remitting back home, older generation diaspora members compensate for smaller remittance volumes by lobbying and by influencing the state apparatus through various forms of political and social activism. This has the effect of shifting the costs borne by individuals to the host state and is consistent with our insights on principal-agent relations between states and diaspora. Although Ukraine’s macroeconomic performance will remain fragile for the foreseeable future, we identify four complementary forms of diaspora engagement in times of crisis, namely the mobilization of aid, political activism and volunteering, remittances and other financial flows, and delegating responsibilities to host-country institutions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".