Identifying Criteria for Complementary Pathways to Provide Sustainable Solutions for Refugees: Two Canadian Case Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter provides critical insights on the main features and implementation dynamics of two Canadian policy instruments falling within the scope of complementary pathways of admission for refugees: the well-established Private Sponsorship of Refugees (PSR) program, a key component of Canada’s refugee resettlement since the late 1970s, and the Economic Mobility Pathways Pilot (EMPP), an initiative launched in 2018 to enable the resettlement of a relatively small but growing number of refugees through Canada’s existing labour migration channels. The analysis aims to identify a set of normative criteria to assess those two pathways’ alignment with international refugee, human rights and labour law standards. It pays specific attention to aspects of equitable access and procedural fairness in the design and implementation of complementary pathways, including the possibility for refugees to exercise their agency and autonomy when accessing and navigating those programmes. Crucially, the chapter discusses which legal and policy adjustments are needed to ensure that Canadian pathways—as well as similar admission instruments developed elsewhere—not only create safe entry channels for refugees additional to resettlement, but also provide them a clear path towards achieving a durable solution.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".