Dynamic advocacy: Legal mobilization and the pursuit of sociolegal change in Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project examines the strategic form and function of legal mobilization. The scholarship on this topic is extensive, yet it falls short of explaining how and why mobilization continues after the enactment of activist won law reform. This project remedies this by exploring the strategic determinants of post-reform sexual assault advocacy in Canada. Be it through consent workshops, online modules or informationally targeted materials, Canadian feminists have increasingly used educational strategies. Questioning how and why these strategies are used, I advance a theoretical account of activists’ opportunities and ambitions. Focusing on factors external to the activist group itself, this project proposes a theory of contemporary legal mobilization that credits the use of educational advocacy to the common pursuit of leadership amongst internally differentiated groups. The dynamics that unfold amongst activists, therefore, ground my study of legal advocacy strategy in the aftermath of legal reform.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it