Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orchestrating Impacts & ResistanceDonna Baines & Stephen McBride (Eds.), Halifax & Winnipeg: Fernwood Publishing, 2014.Donna Baines and Stephen McBride's edited book on addresses one of most important issues of current political economy in western societies: austerity, policy of cutting state budgets to promote growth, has been preferred policy in all OECD countries, since 2008 financial crisis.In this sense, debate about is continues to be highly relevant in all western countries. Orchestrating Impacts and Resistance is result of a workshop organized by Research Group at McMaster University in Canada. It succeeds in positioning itself as a substantial contribution from different Canadian fields of expertise to discuss, in both practical and intellectual terms, not only global context of austerity, but also by applying an interesting and perceptive analysis of Canada's neoliberal politics in its various forms and intensities.Arguably, this edited book offers several scholarly written pieces on with a good overview of literature and critiques. It is highly recommended for those interested in a critical understanding of political economy of austerity, from a Canadian perspective. The book is structured into four parts, offering significant experiences of resistance, with a total of fourteen chapters from scholars, labour organizers and activists from all Canada.Baines and McBride set out aims and objectives of book with an introductory overview of austerity, both historical and theoretically. They question whether is something new about austerity, or if it can be just considered as a new wave of previously existing forms of neoliberalism (pp. 1-19).Part one addresses the context of The chapters under this section explore shift to austerity, its applicability and incidence not only in Europe but also in Canada. Some chapters are more convincing than others. For example, MacBride's chapter In Austerity We Trust (pp. 10-20) is a scholarly written piece, in which he offers a good overview of literature on austerity, notably a critique of Blyth's approach, one of world's leading scholars on austerity. McBride pitches his arguments perfectly, despite his title sounding suspiciously like pop economics. I also found some contradictions with Mark Blyth's book Austerity: The History of a Dangerous Idea. For example, McBride says that there is nothing new in practice or in theory about austerity (pp. 13; 15). However, Mark Blyth has convincingly demonstrated that is a powerful idea rooted in political ideology with its own empirical foundations as well theoretical basis.Part two of this edited book seeks to explore some of Contradictions of in terms of gender equality, unionism, social democracy and class struggle. The chapters under this section help to understand some of feminist critiques of neoliberalism, by rethinking and deconstructing discourse of austerity. These chapters also conflate perspectives from labour movement and social unionism to re-invent solidarity in times of austerity. This interesting discussion within this section helps to outline provocative thesis of this edited book. …
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".