La citoyenneté au temps de l’« intégration civique » : regards croisés France/Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au cours des années 2000, les politiques d’immigration et d’intégration adoptées par divers pays d’Europe et d’Amérique du Nord donnent lieu à la formulation d’un nouveau paradigme d’action publique, qualifié d’« intégration civique ». Ces politiques, telles que les tests et cérémonies de citoyenneté, les formations civiques ou la signature de contrats d’intégration, sont largement présentées comme marquant un « tournant » qualifié de « civique » (« civic turn »). Les reconfigurations à l’œuvre consisteraient, d’une part, à imposer des contraintes plus fortes aux personnes étrangères en matière de titres de séjour ou d’acquisition de la nationalité et, d’autre part, à promouvoir une conception plus « épaisse » (« thick ») de la citoyenneté, où prime la dimension identitaire de l’appartenance à la communauté nationale. Ce numéro spécial a pour objet d’examiner deux cas encore peu étudiés à la lumière du paradigme de l’« intégration civique » : la France et le Canada. À l’aide d’analyses qui allient recherches empiriques et approches théoriques, et qui entrecroisent sociologie, anthropologie, droit, philosophie et science politique, il s’agit de comprendre si les reconfigurations mises au compte d’un « tournant civique » sont en cours dans ces deux contextes spécifiques, et quelles sont leurs éventuelles incidences, pour les migrant.e.s, en termes d’inclusion/exclusion et, pour la société d’installation, en termes de conception du « nous ». During the 2000s, immigration and integration policies of several countries in Europe and North Americagave rise to the formulation of a new paradigm of public action, called “civic integration”. These policies, such as citizenship tests and ceremonies, civic training or the signing of integration contracts, are widely presented as marking what is seen as a “civic turn”. This term implies a revised policy configuration characterized by the imposition of stronger constraints on foreigners in terms of residence permits or citizenship acquisition, and by the promotion of an increasingly “thick” concept of citizenship, emphasizing collective identity and belonging to the national community. In this special issue, we examine two cases that have rarely been studied in light of the “civic integration” paradigm: France and Canada. Through analyses aligning empirical and theoretical research and combining sociology, anthropology, law, philosophy and political science, this special issue seeks to understand if the reconfigurations attributed to a “civic turn” operate in these two specific contexts. It also interrogates these reconfigurations’ consequences both for migrants (in terms of inclusion/exclusion) and for the receiving society (in terms of its conception of “us”).
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".