The Relationship Between the Immigration Department and Community Organizations in the \nIntegration of Immigrants in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is about the contemporary relationship between the Ministère de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration (MIFI) and community organizations (COs) delivering immigrant integration services in Quebec. More precisely, it investigates the role of COs as central actors in the governance processes associated with immigrant integration policies in Quebec. \n \nThe literature on the relationship between the Quebec government and COs points to the distinct recognition that autonomous community action (ACA) enjoys in the province. Although similar to other jurisdictions in its use of New Public Management (NPM) principles, the Quebec model is praised for the central role dedicated to civil society actors in governance processes. Based on a theoretical framework that synthesizes ACA and NPM as two opposing modes of action, this thesis presents an analysis of 10 semi-structured interviews with the leaders of COs active in this sector. \n \nFirst, the results of this research show that COs understand themselves as service providers in their relationship with the MIFI. This is present across the diverse COs analyzed, hinting at a powerful trend that may apply to the whole sector. Second, findings document that the COs interviewed experience difficulties in pursuing their social mission. The limited mission funding and the rare mechanisms COs have developed to foster citizen participation contribute to this situation. These results open the door to a broader reflection on the specificities of the Quebec model and on the changes in the value given to citizen participation in the development of public policies in the province.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".