Access Denied: The Access to Information Act and its Effect on Public Records Creators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article examine comment les organisations bureaucratiques fédérales canadiennes ont réagi lors de l'apparition et de la mise en oeuvre de la Loi sur l'Accès à l'information en 1983.Prenant pour base des modèles théoriques d'organisation, spécifiquement ceux développés par Richard Laughlin, il démontre que les agences et les organismes gouvernementaux ont répondu à la proclamation de la Loi selon un modèle connu et qui colle aux théories contemporaines des organisations quant à la manière dont les institutions sont affectées par le changement.L'article suggère que les organismes fédéraux ont tenté et réussi à minimiser les perturbations entraînées par les pressions d'une plus grande ouverture en retardant le traitement des demandes, en faisant exclure des institutions de l'application de la loi, en modifiant forme et contenu des documents et, dans certains cas, en démontrant un manque de respect malicieux envers les principes mêmes de la loi.L'article conclut sur une discussion de l'impact important de forces externes sur la création ainsi que sur le contenu des documents publics et comment ces perturbations subies par l'univers de la gestion des documents se traduisent dans des comportements susceptibles d'affecter dramatiquement l'héritage documentaire du Canada.ABSTRACT This article examines how Canadian federal bureaucratic organizations have reacted to the introduction and implementation of the Access to Information Act of 1983.It uses organizational theory models, specifically those developed by Richard Laughlin, to demonstrate that government departments and agencies have responded to the promulgation of the act in a recognizable pattern that fits contemporary organizational theory's understanding of how change affects institutions.The article suggests that federal departments have successfully attempted to mitigate the disturbance posed by increased pressures for openness by delaying the processing of requests, transferring agencies out from under the control of the legislation, undertaking changes to documentary form and content, and, in some instances, through the malicious disregard for the tenets of the legislation itself.The article concludes by discussing the significant impact of external forces on the creation and content of public documents and how such disturbances to the record-keeping environment translate into actions which have the potential to dramatically affect Canada's documentary heritage.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".