Canadian Sociological Association Outstanding Contribution Lecture: The Fading of Redistributive Politics in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Are redistributive politics in Canada fading or merely in abeyance? In this essay, I examine the empirical evidence for the “fading” metaphor, examine new, neoliberal lenses that have shaped recent policy developments, and identify changes in the role of political actors and policy‐making institutions that have facilitated the redistributive weakening. Ever the optimist, however, I conclude on an upbeat note on future democratic possibilities for a fairer and more just Canada. La politique de la redistribution au Canada, est‐elle en train de s’étioler ou est‐elle tout simplement en suspens? Dans un premier temps, je pose le contexte empirique à la fois pour et contre la métaphore d’ “étiolement”, tendances concernant la disparité des revenus, la pauvreté, et la répartition du revenu. Dans un deuxième, je me concentre sur le rôle des nouvelles politiques ainsi que sur le soi‐disant virage néolibéral dans l'idéologie politique qui ont façonné nos réponses à ces développements. Finalement, je discute le caractère changeant à la fois des acteurs politiques et des institutions politiques qui ont restructuré d'une façon cumulative la politique de la redistribution des revenus au Canada.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".