Thinking third sector in Canadian and German settlement and social inclusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada and Germany have become major immigrant-receiving countries of the Global North, sharing settlement structures shaped by federal, regional and municipal governments and operated by large and diverse third sectors. Through an integrative literature review, this study critically examines the Canadian and German third sectors involved in settlement and social inclusion initiatives, particularly in the context of neoliberal policymaking prevalent in both countries since the 1980s. First outlining the structure and landscape of settlement in each country, it identifies several shared challenges stemming from neoliberal federal policy and the retreat of the national welfare state. Filling literature gaps in this field is particularly important given recent increases in asylum-seeking in Germany, and the global emergence of right-wing, anti-immigration political movements. The purpose of this study is to serve as the basis for further cross-national consideration, discussion and mutual learning between Canada and Germany. Key words: Canada, Germany, third sector, settlement sector, social inclusion, asylum, immigration, neoliberal policy and restructuring
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".