Local government alternative dispute resolution: a British Columbian case study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This research undertook a case study of the intergovernmental Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process administered by the Ministry of Community Development (MCD) in the province of British Columbia (BC), Canada. This study used concurrent nested mixed research methods in order to discover how best to deliver, monitor, measure, and communicate MCD’s ADR process. The dominant research approach used was qualitative and involved informal interviews and document analysis. The purpose of the interview portion of the research was to flesh out descriptors and perceptions of MCD’s ADR process with the objective of coming to a greater understanding of current and potential delivery, monitoring, measurement, and communication mechanisms most appropriate for the ADR process. The interviews undertaken in this research also provide the opportunity for MCD staff to deliver feedback on, and offer insights into, the research. The document analysis portion of the research involved a textual analysis of MCD’s electronic and print ADR process communications in order to build on the descriptors and perceptions identified in the interviews, providing for a more full understanding of the ADR process and the delivery, monitoring, measuring, and communication strategies best suited to it. The nested quantitative portion of the research involved the use of secondary, anonymized data garnered from a survey prepared by MCD’s Director of Intergovernmental Relations which has been in distribution for a number of years. The survey used a Likert scale to measure process indicators. Data from this survey was analyzed to generate information about how participant respondents in the ADR process perceived certain attributes of the ADR services. Potential implications of this research include: providing applied tools to monitor, measure, and communicate ADR processes, increasing accountability in government administered publicly funded programs, generating ideas around local government ADR processes, improving dispute management in increasingly complex intergovernmental relational contexts, and addressing the literature gap on ADR processes and intergovernmental relations. The general findings of this research included clarification of MCD’s ADR process mission, vision, and goals, its communication strategy, and the perspectives of facilitators on both successful and challenging aspects of process delivery. The research findings also identified gaps in process performance monitoring and measurement and discussed the implications of MCD’s ADR process survey data results. This thesis concludes with recommendations to update process mission, vision, and goals. The thesis also suggests further ways to monitor and communicate MCD’s ADR process and provides templates for doing so. Finally, this thesis identifies opportunities to strengthen practices in process delivery. In the final chapter, areas for future research are suggested including: • ADR program evaluations generally, • Provincially administered inter-local government ADR processes, • Comparative work on inter-local government ADR in other national jurisdictions, • Ways to incorporate diverse methods and cultural approaches to conflicts and disputes into inter-local government ADR processes, • Studies into BC local government perspectives on MCD’s ADR process, and • Ways in which BC First Nations governments could be included in inter-local government ADR processes.
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 | 0,004 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,037 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
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 ».