Theorising Canadian Policy towards the AU and ECOWAS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter proposes an alternative perspective, non-imperial Internationalism, to understand Canadian foreign policy in Africa. The non-imperial internationalist approach draws insights from the theoretical assumptions of constructivists&s; approach to international relations. The chapter argues that Canadian government policy towards the African Union (AU) and Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) can be understood in terms of moral identity/image that Canada has constructed over the years in Africa. It highlights the weaknesses of neo-Gramscian approaches and their inability to help to understand the Canadian government&s;s policy towards the AU and ECOWAS. The mainstream theoretical approaches to Canadian foreign policy are concerned with analysing Canada&s;s status, role, and foreign policy behaviour in global arena as a middle power or principal power. The analyses of the middle power and principal power approaches of Canada&s;s status, policy preferences, behaviour, and national interests on the global stage are rooted in domestic sources of policy-making. These are the liberal pluralist, statist, and dominant class approaches.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".