CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Occupational and Professional Licensing RegulationCanadian Identity and HistoryManagement and Organizational Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Regulating Professions in Canada: Interprovincial Differences across Five Provinces

Adams, Tracey L.·2009·Journal of Canadian Studies
DOI 10.3138/jcs.43.3.194
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This essay looks at the regulation of professions in five Canadian provinces—Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia—from Confederation to 1961 to examine the ways in which professional regulation has historically varied across locale. Interprovincial variations in the timing and content of legislation regulating professions are examined, and explanations for these variations are explored. Overall, the study finds that although there was a core group of professions regulated in all five provinces, there is significant variation across the provinces with respect to which professions were regulated, and when and how they were regulated. Such variations may be partly explained by differential rates in occupational growth, differences in professional organization and interprofessional conflict, and population density.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3138/jcs.43.3.194

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In some cases, nursing regulation was included in a more general analysis of health practitioner regulation.

    “In some cases, nursing regulation was included in a more general analysis of health practitioner regulation [3,110,198,207].”

    From Nursing regulation in Canada: Insights from a scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [110]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Adams, T. L.
Corresponding author
Adams, Tracey L.
ORCID
Adams, Tracey L.
Venue
Journal of Canadian Studies
Publisher
University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress)
Published
2009-08
Volume
43
Issue
3
Pages
194-221
ISSN
  • 0021-9495 (ISSN-L)
  • 1911-0251
DOI
10.3138/jcs.43.3.194
OpenAlex
W1515512747
Cited by
15
References
44
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Canadian Studies (publishedVersion)
  • Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Occupational and Professional Licensing Regulation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Canadian Identity and History
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
Keywords
professional regulation, interprovincial variation, Canadian provinces, professional legislation, occupational growth, professional associations, interprofessional conflict, population density, Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, Saskatchewan, British Columbia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review