Social Capital and Local Governance Regimes: Early Childhood Development Roundtables in British Columbia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACTThe concept of social capital has received enormous attention in social sciences and beyond. Researchers have shown a particular interest in effects - how neighbourhood social capital and local area environments might impact a variety of outcomes in positive and negative ways. However, insufficient attention has been given to issues of local governance in social capital literature, despite much of public policy, urban politics and multilevel governance literature associating local democracy with positive policy outcomes. Surprisingly, little such research has considered local governance in area of early childhood development (ECD). Therefore, paper will explore relationship between effects and local democracy within setting of policies for families and children. It will map and compare community governance structures at work in area of ECD in several communities in British Columbia (BC), Canada. Through lens of feminist political economy, paper canvasses ECD roundtables across BC communities, and identifies at least three regimes: Traditional Public Administration (TPA), New Public Management (NPM), and Community Democracy (CD). While all three are strongly shaped by dominant neoliberal context, community democracy seems to be most successful in bringing together procedural and substantive democracy in realm of ECD.Keywords: social capital; democracy; community engagementA Feminist Political Economy of Social Capital and Local GovernanceDespite immense popularity of social capital as an analytical and conceptual tool, it has attracted much criticism. While social capital can be useful to social science, greater attention must be paid to power relations in which it is embedded. This study locates both social capital and governance within a neoliberal gender order and an overarching political economy of residualism for ECD policy at both provincial and federal scales in Canada.Social Capital and Local GovernanceA range of social capital components (network ties and diversity, neighbourhood attachment, resources, collective efficacy, personal safety, health) are relevant to area of ECD. However, social capital tends to direct focus to level of individual or family (Warner, 1999), and not to impact of local governance and political processes and institutions (such as local political economy, community partnerships, citizen engagement) on child outcomes. This is indicative of a significant gap in social capital research, which largely sidesteps issues of democracy and state. In bulk of literature, very little is said about role of government in fostering or damaging social capital (Kumlin and Rothstein, 2005; OECD, 2001; Skocpol, 1996; Taylor, 2002 and 2003; Warner, 1999). Yet as Taylor indicates, the state has an important role to play in creating conditions in which social capital, and indeed civil society, can thrive and avoiding policies which destroy them (2003: 230). Local government can support and complement social capital development in communities (Taylor 2003; OECD 2001). Governance is also needed to address inequalities in social capital.This project makes questions of governance central to process of socialcapital development. It also contributes to public policy, urban politics, and multilevel governance literature, which associates local democracy with positive policy outcomes (Bradford, 2003a, 2005 and 2007). In doing so, study explores relationship between two concepts that have thus far remained largely distinct: effects (Kershaw et al., 2007) and neighbourhood, local, or community democracy (Taylor 2003). Neighbourhood effects refers to the impact on developmental outcomes of area in which children live (Beauvais and Jenson, 2003: v).Researchers have been canvassing multiplicity of experiments in neighbourhood, local, or community democracy, but seldom in area of ECD (Beauvais and Jenson 2003). …
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».