MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W88153881 · doi:10.1177/002070201106600209

Reconfiguring Canadian Democracy Promotion

2011· article· en· W88153881 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Neil Burron

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyDemocracy promotionForeign policyPublic administrationAgency (philosophy)ProsperityGovernment (linguistics)Political sciencePromotion (chess)SociologyLawPoliticsDemocratizationSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Convergence with the US approach?The promotion of democracy has been a key element of Canadian foreign policy and development assistance for over two decades. Although its contributions are still modest in comparison to those of other development agencies, the Canadian International Development Agency's budget for democracy assistance has grown steadily over the years, doubling over io years from $223 million in 1996 to $477.9 million in 2006.1 Along with freedom, human rights, and the rule of law, democracy is one of four core values guiding the foreign policy of the current Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and supporting democracy (or, in the bureaucratese of the agency, helping to strengthen governance institutions and practices) remains a CIDA priority. At the regional level, moreover, democracy, security, and prosperity comprise the three pillars of the government's Americas strategy.At first glance, there is little objectionable about a foreign policy that emphasizes the importance of supporting democratic development - even if some might argue that the Harper government's own behaviour at home renders it an unlikely candidate for giving lessons on democracy abroad. There are indications, however, that Canada is subordinating its overall approach to democracy promotion to foreign policy obj ectives that in fact have very little to do with democracy. This includes two interrelated tendencies: the use of democracy promotion as a rationale to advance unrelated security objectives and commercial interests, and the attempt to exert greater control over the democracy assistance community of practice, a term that will be addressed below.As governments across the hemisphere contest the neoliberal development model, Canadian democracy promotion is increasingly being used as a political device to promote free markets and to criticize governments that have strayed from the Washington consensus. In the new discourse, democracy is conflated with the market and security is seen as the precondition of its realization. The subordination of democracy promotion to foreign policy objectives with questionable linkages to democracy involves tendencies that predate the current government, including the increasing subordination of CIDA to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. Under Harper, however, the independence of Canada's main arm's-length democracy agency, Rights and Democracy, has come under attack, while many progressive nongovernmental organizations involved in supporting democracy have seen their funding cut. Such developments threaten what remains of Canada's rights -based approach to democratic development with its expansive view of citizenship and focus on empowering grassroots organizations. For those who believe that Canada still has a positive role to play on the international stage, these are worrying times.Lurking in the background of these developments is the failure of a similar approach to democracy promotion by the United States. Although US democracy programs often provide support to actors from across the political spectrum, a defining characteristic of the US approach has been a tendency to use democracy promotion as a justification to criticize ideological opponents - whatever their democratic credentials - and to use democracy assistance as a political tool to advance economic interests. As Canadian parliamentarians have themselves recognized, Canada's growing involvement in democracy promotion comes at a time when the US approach has come under fire.The purpose of this article is thus twofold: to bring to the fore legitimate concerns surrounding the US approach and the backlash it has encountered, and to situate the evolution of Canadian democracy promotion within ideological and institutional changes that portend a closer alignment with this approach. I look specifically at the evolution of the democracy promotion communities of practice and their relation to larger foreign policy objectives in both countries, using the Americas as a regional backdrop to explore these issues in greater detail. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0250.007
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy AnalysisSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207