MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1925536817 · doi:10.22230/cjnser.2014v5n2a164

Tales of Policy Estrangement: Non-governmental Policy Work and Capacity in Three Canadian Provinces

2014· article· en· W1925536817 on OpenAlex
Bryan Evans, Adam Wellstead

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of nonprofit and social economy research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Corporate governancePublic policyState (computer science)Political sciencePublic administrationSociologyWelfare economicsEconomicsManagementLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, there have been a number of Canadian-based studies of federal and provincial government policy workers. One key theme across all of these studies is the importance of well-established networks outside of government. However, these studies have demonstrated that government policy workers interact very infrequently outside the comfort of their own department cubicles. This stands in contrast to the considerable literature on new public governance theory, which suggests that non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including nonprofit groups, should, and do, play an important role in shaping public policy. This article provides some insights into this question and identifies where NGO–government interaction does exist. The descriptive results from a survey of non-governmental organization policy workers across four fields (environment, health, labour, and immigration) in three Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Ontario) clearly illustrate the limitations, at all levels, on interaction between NGO groups and government officials. The article argues that this does not disprove the basic tenet of new governance theory—that non-state actors are engaged, to some degree, in the policy process. The article examines the results of an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model to determine what factors shape and drive NGO interaction with government. RÉSUMÉ Depuis peu, bon nombre d’études canadiennes sont apparues sur les stratèges des gouvernements fédéral et provinciaux. Un thème clé dans ces études est l’importance de maintenir des réseaux viables au-delà du gouvernement. Pourtant, selon diverses études, les stratèges gouvernementaux interagissent très peu au-delà de leurs bureaux à cloisons. Cette situation ne reflète pas l’approche recommandée dans les nombreux écrits recourant à la théorie de la nouvelle gouvernance publique. Celle-ci recommande aux organisations non-gouvernementales (ONG), y compris aux groupes sans but lucratif, de jouer un rôle plus important dans la formulation des politiques publiques. Cet article explore cette question et identifie les domaines où existent des interactions entre ONG et gouvernements. Les résultats d’un sondage de stratèges d’ONG dans quatre domaines (environnement, santé, travail et immigration) dans trois provinces canadiennes (Colombie-Britannique, Saskatchewan et Ontario) illustrent clairement les contraintes, à tous les niveaux, sur les interactions entre ONG et gouvernements. L’article soutient que cette situation ne contredit pas le principe fondamental de la théorie de la nouvelle gouvernance publique, à savoir que des acteurs non gouvernementaux s’engagent effectivement, jusqu’à un certain point, dans la formulation de politiques. Cet article examine en outre les résultats de l’application d’une méthode des moindres carrés pour déterminer quels sont les facteurs qui influencent et motivent les interactions entre ONG et gouvernements

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it