(Dis)Empowerment and Self-Rule: Fiscal Federalism and Minority Nations in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Federalism is often advanced as a means to enable the coexistence of diverse peoples beneath a common umbrella of a shared state apparatus. Scholars have long considered how the division of powers and the allocation of jurisdictional capacities among multiple orders of government may empower and foster the autonomy of internal national minority communities. Until recently, however, the ways in which the fiscal arrangements of a federation may affect the coexistence of diverse peoples have remained largely unexplored. Using the case of Canada, this chapter identifies the concrete features of fiscal federalism that may contribute to—or detract from—the empowerment of internal minority national communities. Drawing from the Canadian experience, three features of a fiscal architecture are directly related to the realization of minority national empowerment: (1) representation and participation in the management of fiscal arrangements; (2) the independence of the revenue base that is available to internal communities; and (3) the conditions and time horizons that are associated with the arrangements.
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 | 0.000 | 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".