MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990139933

Contemporary democratic separatist movements: The politics of new state creation by referendum

2021· dissertation· en· W6990139933 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueIDEALS (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferendumDemocracyState (computer science)PoliticsSovereigntyIndependence (probability theory)Popular sovereigntyIdentity (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a comprehensive analysis of the conditions under which new states have been, and may be, created through exclusively democratic means. Existing literature explains the majority of such cases: those that occurred through the processes of decolonization, or through the break up of post-communist federations. However, we lack a general theory that can account for other such cases, most typified by independence movements in places such as Catalonia, Scotland, and Quebec. This dissertation supplies that theory, as well as empirical analyses of hypotheses derived therefrom, and offers explanations for the actions of states, regions, and voters undergoing such a process. The first chapter introduces the concept of democratic separatism, describes its process, compares it to other mechanisms for new state creation, and investigates the history of the phenomenon. It finds that, outside of decolonization and post-communist federal disintegration, the achievement of internationally-recognized sovereignty through democratic separatism is a rare phenomenon. The second chapter proposes a set of attributes that, when simultaneously present, constitute a sufficient condition for the emergence of successful democratic separatist movements. The third chapter considers the strategic interaction that occurs between a nation-state, and a democratic separatist movement therein. At question is the holding and endorsing of a popular referendum on the question of secession. I propose a framework for how we may interpret the motivations and interests behind certain actions that may be taken by the state or the movement. The concluding fourth chapter focuses on individual voters as the unit of analysis and presents evidence that regional identity remains a strong correlate for supporting a separatist movement, and that alternatives proposed in extant literature (namely, economic inequality and supranational integration) are not.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.037
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIDEALS (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign)Same topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207