Structural specialization: Canada-U.S. relations and Canada's place in the world
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of international relations generally presupposes that the structural context within which states interact is 'anarchic;' meaning, without an overarching authority to preside over a common, comprehensive body of law. Systemic theorists have accordingly been content to assume that only the anarchic context is of relevance when hypothesizing about the predominant patterns of state behaviour. This study breaks with tradition and investigates the implications of hierarchical structures forming within the broader international anarchy. In so doing, it opens two unexplored areas of international relations to systemic theorizing: (1) the high political interactions between super- and subordinate states; and (2) the behaviour of subordinate states in the international system. The predominant patterns of these seemingly distinct, though fundamentally related areas of international relations are revealed and explained through the analysis of six case studies in Canada-U.S. relations: the Vietnam War (1954-1973); the Cuban Missile Crisis (1961-1962); Nuclear Weapons (1954-present); Missile Defence (1984-present); The War on Terror (2001-present); and Transnational Security After 9/11. These cases affirm two counterintuitive hypotheses. The first is that high political interactions between super- and subordinate states follow a non-linear (as opposed to straightforward) pattern towards contradictory (as opposed to mutually beneficial) policy outcomes. This is due to the fact that in intra-hierarchical high political interactions, the dual structural contexts of anarchy and hierarchy combine to push and pull super- and subordinate states in contrasting directions, ultimately leaving a contradictory imprint on their policy outcomes. The second is that subordinate states carry out specialized roles in the international system not fitted for great powers as an alternative to traditional means (balancing against superordinate power through alliance formation or arms build-up) of ensuring their sovereign survival. Like individuals in domestic society, subordinate states must specialize in order to survive as independent sovereign units in the international system. The study concludes by drawing out further areas in which structural specialization is likely to matter, before setting down the grand strategic implications of the findings for Canada-U.S. relations and Canada's place in the world.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".