Legacy Refugee Claimants in Canada: Integration and Substantive Citizenship Within a Liminal Space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2012, during a period of refugee policy reform in Canada, nearly 32 000 asylum claimants were pushed behind in the waitlist to finalize their claim (Refugee Board of Canada, 2019). Refugee claimants who had arrived prior to enacted changes found themselves suspended within a state of undetermined status. This group, acquiring the title of ‘legacy claimants’, was faced with establishing life in Canada inside a zone of ‘liminality’, that is, “between recognized fixed points in space-time of structural classification†(Turner 1967, p. 96; Menjivar, 2003, p. 1007). This study seeks to explore how the obstacles faced by legacy claimants due to undetermined status impact integration and substantive citizenship. The research goals are met through a narrative analysis of legacy claimant experiences using the lens of social constructivism and by foregrounding the zone of ‘liminal legality’ as both restrictive and conductive to new forms of inclusion and citizenship (Menjivar, 2006). Key words: Refugees; citizenship; liminality; substantive citizenship; narrative analysis
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.038 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".