Restricting rights, losing control : immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers, and the regulation of Canada's border, 1867-1988
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through an in-depth study of the Canadian case, this thesis demonstrates how a loss of control over national borders can result from liberal-democratic state efforts to restrict the rights of non-citizens. It argues that the gaps created between certain fundamental due process and equality rights and state control practice increase the risk of policy failure by opening up avenues along which the authority and capacity of the state can be challenged effectively---by encouraging rights-based politics, irregular migration, and administrative inefficiencies. Part I provides an overview of recent international migration trends, followed by a detailed examination of the liberal-democratic control literature, identifying three biases---restrictionist, domestic-statist, and historical---that obscure the state's role in the creation and perpetuation of control problems. In response, this thesis employs an analytic framework rooted in the concept of the universe of political discourse to trace the evolution and interaction of two competing perspectives that have defined Canadian control policy debates and developments since Confederation, Liberal Internationalism and Liberal Nationalism, each of which posits a different relationship between the rights of non-citizens and the state. Part II presents a thorough account of Canadian control policies towards immigrants and refugees from 1867 to 1965, and reveals that the proposed link between rights-restrictive policies and control problems has deep liberal-democratic roots in Canada. Part III focuses on Canadian policies towards asylum seekers from 1965 to 1988, and demonstrates the central role that the state's rights-restrictive approach played in the creation, breakdown, and replacement of the country's first inland refugee status determination system. Parts II and III are based on an extensive examination of published Canadian government documents, and secondary materials from the fields of history, legal studies, and politics, among other sources. In a concluding chapter, it is argued that by giving greater conceptual and empirical clarity to control, the findings presented in this thesis are of continued relevance to the study of control policies---contemporary or historical---in Canada and other liberal democracies.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".