Who Cares? Women's Work, Childcare, and Welfare State Redesign. (Book Reviews/Comptes Rendus)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Jane Jenson and Mariette Sineau with seven contributing authors, Who Cares? Women's Work, Childcare, and Welfare State Redesign. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001, 289 pp. This is a nine-chapter book with contributions from nine social scientists. However five of chapters are co-written by Jane Jenson and Mariette Sineau, including introductory and concluding chapters that give book analytical and theoretical coherence. Jane Jenson's work is well known Canada, and central thesis of Who Cares?, that welfare state redesign since early 1980s has been accompanied by a shift foundational principles of (p. 262), was previously elaborated a series of publications (e.g., Jenson and Phillips, 1996; Jenson, 1997). This particular book began a study commissioned by Caisses Nationales des Allocations Familiales, the public body France most responsible for implementing family (p. ix). Mariette Sineau is a French political scientist and director of research Conseil national de recherche scientifique. Jenson and Sineau define regime as widely accepted ideas about relationship between citizen and state and balance of power among state, market, and community (p.24l; a more institutional definition is found on p. 8). Their objective Who Cares? is to examine ways which a key value of citizenship, that of equality -- particularly gender equality -- has been taken into account or ignored redesign of childcare services these neo-liberal times (p. 8). Childcare is thus not of intrinsic interest this book; rather childcare is a strategically selected policy domain that provides a window into ... recomposition of citizenship (p. 211). In keeping with this objective, authors interpretively read details of changes childcare policies and changing representations of gender expressed debates about childcare policies indicators of modifications very principles underpinning (p. 242). The book employs a nested case study design. At primary level of policy domain, one case (childcare) is selected for study. At secondary level of political unit, five cases of childcare are selected: Belgium, France, Italy, Sweden and European Union. For each political unit, childcare policies and gender representations accompanying policies are studied over time, with particular emphasis on period from early 1970s to 1990s. Jenson and Sineau then systematically compare findings for five political units. They conclude that there is convergence five cases towards a set of basic principles childcare provision: less costly services, decentralization of service provision from central government to local authorities, increased diversification programs available and conditions of access to them, greater flexibility use of childcare, and individualization of (p. 16). In general, childcare policies have shifted in direction of privileging m arkets and individual citizens' market power to choose (p. 255). They interpret this evidence that regimes of redesigned welfare states are of a fundamentally different character than regimes of post-war Keynesian welfare state: choice has replaced equality principal value and market has replaced state dominant sector (p. …
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 | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,031 | 0,010 |
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 ».