Provincial and Municipal Restructuring in Canada: Assessing Expectations and Outcomes
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Provincial-municipal restructuring in Canada has received considerable attention during the 1990s from both provincial and municipal levels of government. The fiscal download by the Federal government to the provinces and the municipalities, along with the growing acceptance of a new public management philosophy, have been the two common variables encouraging provincial-municipal reforms over the last decade. With Federal initiatives directed towards shifting a greater portion of the financial burden of governance and service delivery on to the Provinces, as evident with reductions in federal grants and alterations to Federal-provincial cost sharing rules, the provinces have themselves been actively involved with the reorganisation of their own financial and political structures. While these fiscal reforms were in part attributed to the economic pressures of the 1990s, they were also attributed to a new approach in public management at all levels of government that increasingly promoted the entrepreneurial spirit of the private sector in the public realm. The provincial-municipal restructuring initiatives involved increasing municipal fiscal responsibilities in governance and service delivery through the reduction of provincial grants, the reallocation of governance and service responsibilities between the provinces and local governments, and the encouragement of municipal mergers. This special issue on provincial-municipal reforms in Canada will focus particular attention on municipal consolidations. However, other provincial-municipal restructuring initiatives, including the allocation of service responsibilities and alternative service delivery options, will also be explored in order to review the full dimension of the recent reform strategies. Municipal Consolidations Municipal consolidations, whether in the form of amalgamations (the merging of two incorporated municipalities) or annexations (the appropriation of a portion of a municipality by an adjacent municipal unit) have been taking place in North America since the 19th century. Initially, advocates of consolidation have argued that this reform would lead to efficiency improvements that were to be realised by the single, larger, governing unit. Cost savings from consolidation are generally expected with reductions in municipal staff and elected political officials, reductions in the duplication of public agencies, lower costs associated with purchasing in larger quantities, and cost savings from specialisation and coordination improvements in the larger bureaucracy. While the efficiency argument still remains an important component of the debate on municipal consolidation, proponents of this reform have also advanced other arguments supporting the merger of smaller municipalities. Advocates of consolidation have argued that municipal consolidation can also lead to improvements in equity, regional planning, economic development, and citizen access to services, bureaucracy, and elected officials. With numerous municipal consolidations taking place in Canada in the mid- to late- 1990s, including the consolidation of two major urban regions -- the Halifax-Dartmouth Region, Nova Scotia (1996) and Metropolitan Toronto, Ontario (1998) -- the importance of this reform initiative within Canada remains unquestionable. However, the realisation of anticipated governance and service delivery improvements (in efficiency, equity, regional planning, economic development, and citizen access) have still not been convincingly demonstrated. Articles in this special issue of the Canadian Journal of Regional Science will examine a number of recent consolidations in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Ontario, as well as the current consolidation debates in Quebec and British Columbia, which will reveal the complexity and the controversy of this particular reform. In her contribution, Enid Slack examines the financial and political impacts of amalgamating six lower tier municipalities and the upper tier metro level of government into the new City of Toronto. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,026 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».