MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413989740 · doi:10.1080/09692290.2025.2549090

Financing the border: racial capitalism, migration, and the practices of the Canadian state

2025· article· en· W4413989740 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali Bhagat, Rachel Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of International Political Economy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapitalismState (computer science)Political sciencePolitical economyEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is often recognised as one of the most progressive nations in the world when it comes to the acceptance of refugees and multiculturalism as national policy. However, the longer history of border management on the grounds of race cannot be ignored. Focusing on the contemporary Canadian border regime, we ask: How is the Canadian border financed and maintained, and how do the practices of the border materially impact the lives of racialised people who are allowed to enter Canada? We answer these questions as follows: First, we examine the public funding infrastructure of the border, by which we mean the national budgeting for border protection and the policing of those deemed illegal or irregular. Second, we interrogate how the Canadian state permits and facilitates the exploitation of the racialised migrant labourers who are allowed into the nation, to the benefit of businesses and credit issuers. Through this two-pronged analysis, we argue that the Canadian border and immigration regime is illustrative of a racial capitalist state which functions to (1) exclude unwanted people from the nation, (2) facilitate low-wage labour exploitation, and (3) incorporate racialised migrants into wider systems of credit and debt.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of International Political EconomySame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207