MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7126353998

Addressing the UK Public Trust Crisis: Rethinking Mechanisms for Representation and Accountability in the Constitution of the UK

2025· other· en· W7126353998 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicky Gillibrand

Notice bibliographique

RevueResearch Repository UCD (University College Dublin) · 2025
Typeother
Langueen
Domaine
Thématique
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDistrustPoliticsAccountabilityPublic trustContext (archaeology)Blind trustConstitutionRepresentation (politics)LegitimacyPublic sphere
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Public trust in political institutions and actors is at a historic low, continuing on a downward trajectory. The present failure to successfully address the lack of public trust in politics has constitutional implications due to culture, context and constitutions being increasingly accepted as interconnected. This thesis aims to address the public trust deficit in the UK, first by reviewing and contextualising the notion of trust from an interdisciplinary perspective, in the process noting that low levels of trust have significant implications on the political system and constitutional architecture of a state, including public (dis)engagement, appetite for constitutional change and priming the political sphere for rising populism. It is, therefore, timely given contemporary events such as Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic response that have increased the strain on an already ‘unsettled’ constitution, and the pervasive nature of mounting political distrust that constitutional law academics and beyond work towards generating potential solutions. The solutions provided within the course of this thesis are arrived at by virtue of responding to the calls for methodological pluralism, by incorporating methods most regularly seen in other social science disciplines, including empirical data, both quantitative and original qualitative data, comparative approaches, doctrine, and of course, theoretical analysis. In doing so, the conclusions formed within the thesis is that public (dis)trust arises in two core forms in the United Kingdom: concerns regarding perceived insufficient representation and grievances to do with the belief that political institutions and actors lack accountability for their actions. In order to work towards addressing these grievances, two measures are put forward. In response to the perceived lack of representation, the institutionalisation of Citizens’ Assemblies in the UK as a democratic innovation is suggested. Such an approach gains its legitimacy from the success of their implementation in other jurisdictions such as Ireland, Iceland and Canada (British Columbia and Ontario), the overwhelmingly positive feedback from the Citizens’ Assemblies on Brexit, in addition to existing quantitative survey data on the matter. Accordingly, a blueprint mechanising its implementation, building upon the learned experiences from the use of Citizens’ Assemblies elsewhere and paying due regard to the importance of input, throughput and output suggests potential emanations of Citizens’ Assemblies that may be best suited to the UK. To address accountability concerns, given the existence of the Electoral Commission and as a response to the political trend towards placing fetters on the regulator, it is suggested that the Electoral Commission becomes the inaugural body of constitutional significance. Such an approach learns from the constitutional statutes established in Thoburn v Sunderland City Council that display the UK constitution’s potential for dynamism. The legitimacy of this preposition is derived by virtue of incorporating focus group data which displayed an interesting consensus towards a willingness to place more trust in the relatively unknown Electoral Commission rather than their elected representatives. However, concerns remained in relation to the ability of the government to corrupt or impact the work of the Electoral Commission. As such, constitutionalisation would go some way to allaying these concerns. While these two approaches are posed as solutions, it is concluded that they are best understood as mechanisms that have the potential to work in a fruitful symbiosis towards re-establishing the constitutional order, working in tandem with the existing institutions of the state in order to re-establish public trust in the long term.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,036
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,113
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,075
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,298

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0360,113
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0100,033
Communication savante0,0270,019
Science ouverte0,0030,013
Intégrité de la recherche0,0090,009
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0070,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,180
Tête enseignante GPT0,373
Écart entre enseignants0,192 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResearch Repository UCD (University College Dublin)Travaux en français237 207