Culture and strategy in the North American middle powers during the neoliberal era. The politics of strategic policy in Mexico and Canada, 1988-2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a study of the evolution of the strategic policy of Mexico and Canada during the advent and consolidation of neoliberalism in North America. The thesis examines the interaction between the various strategic approaches rooted in policy elites in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. In the case of Mexico, the struggle between the historical nationalist doctrine and emerging continentalist practices is analysed. In the case of Canada, tensions between the liberal internationalist tradition, the Atlanticist strategic approach, and the renewed continentalist notion are evaluated. This dissertation pays special attention to the socio-political context in which foreign, trade, and security policies were formulated; as well as the cultural dynamics of the strategic decision-making process. The study reconsiders the responses of Mexican and Canadian policy elites to domestic and external pressures that occurred from 1988 to 2015. Based on a structuralist-constructivist approach focused on practice, this work provides a new interpretation of continuity and change in strategic policy before and after the political transitions of Mexico and Canada in 2000 and 2006, respectively. This thesis shows why and how the major strategic traditions of Canada and Mexico were gradually replaced by continentalist ideas, which were much more influential throughout this period than is commonly recognised. The result is a comprehensive reassessment of the foreign policy and security strategies of the middle powers of North America from an emerging perspective in the discipline of international history and international relations during a pivotal period in contemporary history: the neoliberal era.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".