Fiscal Federalism in Multinational States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Substate nationalism is often studied as a question of political identity and cultural recognition. The same applies to the study of multinational federalism – it is mainly conceived as a tool for the accommodation of minority cultures and identities. Few works in political philosophy and political science pay attention to the fiscal and redistributive dimensions of substate nationalism and multinational federalism. Yet nationalist movements in Western countries make crucial claims about fiscal autonomy and the fair distribution of resources between national groups within the same state. In recent years, Scottish nationalists have demanded greater tax autonomy, Catalan and Flemish nationalists have viewed themselves as unfairly disadvantaged by centralized fiscal arrangements, and equalization payments and social transfers in Canada have exacerbated tensions within the federation. In Fiscal Federalism in Multinational States contributors from political philosophy and political science disciplines explore the fiscal side of substate nationalism in Canada, Belgium, the United Kingdom, Spain, and Australia. Chapters examine the connection between secessionist claims and interregional redistributive arrangements, power relations in federations where taxing and spending responsibilities are shared between orders of government, the relationship between substate nationalism and fiscal autonomy, and the role of federal governments in redistributing resources among substate national groups. Fiscal Federalism in Multinational States brings together scholars of nationalism and federalism in a groundbreaking analysis of the connections between nationalist claims and fiscal debates within plurinational states.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".