MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028791241

The Glass Menagerie of Refugee Resettlement: Securitization post 9/11 and Refugee Resettlement Regimes in Germany and Canada

2023· article· en· W7028791241 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigitalResearch@Fordham (Fordham University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeDisplaced personImmigrationSecuritizationInternally displaced personPoliticsRepatriation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aims to demonstrate how 9/11 in the United States impacted the international securitization of borders movement and served as a push factor for an influx of displaced people from the regions affected by the War on Terror and its expansion. Through the case studies of Canada and Germany, this paper addresses how the two developed countries handled the growing demand for resettlement programs to accommodate and integrate displaced people, such as refugees and asylum seekers after 9/11, into their social and economic spheres through resettlement programs. This paper analyzes the successes and shortcomings of these two refugee resettlement regimes in accommodating the resettled refugees in their country. This research reveals that the current approach taken by more developed nations, specifically by Germany and Canada, are praiseworthy due to their open and swift resolutions of taking on migrants from the regions of the world that often pose a threat to many western nations due to preconceived notions and stereotypes. The two countries, effectively understand their responsibility as members of the international community and hence adequately address the needs for growing changes in their immigration policies despite the domestic political upheaval any immigration legislation might cause in the future. The shortcomings of the two case studies I review are imbedded in the alarming deficiency in the refugee resettlement regimes that serve as a model for the rest of the world on handling and resettlement of millions of forced migrants that are displaced due to the indirect but clear causational relationship of 9/11 wars, especially War on Terror. Under these regimes, it is clear that main points of deficiencies arise from inadequate accommodations of resettled migrants in not just socio-political integration but also in economic integration, which restrains their ability towards upward social mobility in the states that they have emigrated into. As a way forward, and a potential solution to the shortcomings that I have found through my research, I recommend that an international organization such as the UN be actively involved in providing a blueprint on refugee resettlement programs that member states adopt or have in place both on a domestic and international level. Through integrating bodies like the UN, there could be room for creation of recommendations, best practices, model legislations, training, research, and guidelines on how to better accommodate refugees into host states and promote sustainable development and upward mobility for those getting resettled as well as the host states themselves. These recommendations must be taken into consideration when thinking about potential solutions to the problems the international community has in hand.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.250 · 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