L'efficacité du droit de l'internationalisation des municipalités du Québec. Une voie de compréhension des relations entre les normes des trois ordres gouvernementaux
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The normative statements framing the exchanges maintained by the municipalities of Quebec with the international scene, qualified as the law of the municipal internationalization, are misunderstood both by the doctrine and by their recipients.The concept of normative effectiveness offers a grid for understanding the law of municipal internationalization through the search for the objectives pursued by the authors of the normative statements that make up this law and the analysis of the means to materialize the objectives. However, this analytical approach is complicated by the plurality of levels of government enacting these normative statements, namely the municipal, provincial and federal governments.Also, this thesis describes how - and with what efficacy - the normative statements from within the different levels of government forming the law of municipal internationalization coexist in Quebec. To this end, this research uses a mixed methodological approach comprising functionalist analyzes of legal theory, comparative law as well as empirical legal science.The study adopts an empirical approach by having recourse to material sources (historical, political and philosophical) in order to apprehend the foundations of the law of municipal internationalization and its formal expressions (normative statements), emphasizing in particular the influence of the federalist philosophy and the principle of subsidiarity on the intensity of the relationships between the norms of the governmental orders. It is also based on empirical data from qualitative interviews and the results of a quantitative survey conducted among Quebec municipalities, done, on the one hand, for exploratory and informational purposes, to trace the main developments in municipal internationalization which tend more towards economic motivations. On the other hand, with the aim of understanding the impact of the standards of other levels of government on the internationalization of municipalities and their relationship with municipal norms.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".