Le fédéralisme coopératif comme terrain de jeu du droit : une introduction (Cooperative Federalism as Law’s Playground: An Introduction)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Ce texte souligne deux aspects des ‘jeux du droit’ dans le contexte du federalisme cooperatif. D’une part, il s’agit d’une analogie avec divers « jeux » de la vie courante : le mikado institutionnel; les jeux d’adresse dans l’articulation des competences constitutionnelles; le du chat et de la souris entre les regles juridiques et les jeux de pouvoirs inherents au registre politique. D’autre part, on entend le « » dans le sens de l’espace, de la souplesse, present dans le cadre constitutionnel et juridique des federations. Le texte introduit ensuite, de maniere critique, les differentes contributions du numero special de la revue Federalisme – Regionalisme portant sur le federalisme cooperatif en identifiant des paralleles et des particularites dans le fonctionnement du federalisme cooperatif dans les federations belge, canadienne, suisse et europeenne. Cette recherche collective contribue a l’etude du role que remplit le droit dans la gouvernance des politiques publiques au sein des structures federales. Bien que le federalisme repose en principe sur une charpente juridique et sur la primaute du droit, le federalisme cooperatif valse entre les terrains de juridique et politique. Au terme de l’etude comparee, il appert que le de cache-cache entre droit et politique peut etre plus destabilisateur dans une structure federale que dans un Etat unitaire, parce que le federalisme rend les jeux plus evidents, plus visibles, chacun des acteurs pouvant invoquer sa propre legitimite politique et ses competences dans un a multi-niveaux. English Abstract: This text underlines two dimensions of the “game” (“jeu”, in French) metaphor in the context of cooperative federalism. First, it presents an analogy with various games in everyday life: institutional Mikado; games of skill in the articulation of constitutional powers; a game of cat and mouse between legal rules and power games inherent to the political register. Second, it explores the way in which there is some room to maneuver (another meaning of jeu in French) in the legal systems of federations. The authors then introduce, in a critical manner, the contributions to this special issue on cooperative federalism by identifying parallels and specificities in the way in which “cooperative federalism” unfolds in the Belgian, Canadian, Swiss and European federations. This collective project contributes to the study of law’s role in governing public policies within federal structures. Although federalism rests in principle on a legal frame and on the rule of law, cooperative federalism waltzes between legal and political playgrounds. Overall, the study suggest that the hide-and-seek game between law and politics may be more destabilizing in federal structures than in unitary States because federalism makes games more obvious, more visible, since each actor can invoke its own political legitimacy and its powers in a multilevel game.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".