Evaluation of Canadian Refugee Resettlement Programs in the Assimilation of Refugees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effectiveness of resettlement initiatives on refugee assimilation in Canada is assessed using the Longitudinal Immigration Database (IMDB) to follow refugee income variations between 1982-2015. To determine the short-and-long term variations in the labour integration process for different refugee sponsorship types, government-sponsored refugees (GARs) and privately-sponsored refugees (PSRs) are analyzed using an unconditioned and conditioned mean approach for 1, 3, 7, 10, and 15 years after landing in Canada. The impact of the Resettlement Assistance Program (RAP) on GARs’ conditioned mean incomes one and three years after migration is also assessed using the annual Public Accounts of Canada expenditure data in combination with the IMDB. Refugee assimilation is compared to federal skilled worker (FSW) class immigrants, the control group, to account for period effects. The results show that both PSR and GAR earnings converge to FSW in-about 15 years after migration. Furthermore, we find that higher RAP income support amounts have deterring effects on labour decisions, thereby delaying the labour integration process in comparison to the lowest years.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".