CANADA'S THIRD NATIONAL POLICY: THE EPIPHENOMENAL OR THE REAL CONSTITUTION?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The idea of the National Policy as both a collective endeavour and a framework for detailed policy analysis is more constitutive of the Canadian state and its governing instruments than is any of its renamed Constitution Acts. National policies originate in the actions and demands of citizens and are often framed by cultural and economic elites before being appropriated by politicians. This essay begins with a descriptive genealogy of Canada's three National Policies (np1, from the 1840s through the 1930s; np2, from the 1930s through the 1970s; and np3, from 1980 onward). In subsequent sections, the essay elaborates the principles and components of Canada's contemporary National Policy, based on the notion of embedded citizen agency. It then explores a set of hypotheses about integrative action in the traditional analytic registers for thinking about the National Policy: economic, communications, and social policy. Canada's third National Policy is an emerging fact reflected in a number of initiatives taken by both Liberal and Conservative governments over the past thirty years. That said, the substantive policy commitments that this third National Policy entails are not fully predetermined but remain open for continuing political decision. Debating those possibilities will shape the country more profoundly than any attempts to perfect Canada's formal institutional arrangements, the epiphenomenal constitution.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".