Canadian state-owned enterprises: a framework for analyzing the evolving Crowns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the privatization of many state-owned enterprises (SOEs), Canadian governments continue to own and operate numerous Crown corporations in a host of different sectors. Drawing its conclusions from the evolution of six Canadian Crowns, this article will explain both why these firms continue to exist in the public sphere as well as examine how their governance and organizational condition(s) have changed. With one exception, these firms have drastically modernized all aspects of their operations such that they are able to meet the needs of their citizen customers, various stakeholders and, most critically, their single shareholders. Historically imposed institutional variables, the political and policy needs of their respective owners and constraints on the decision-making powers of Canadian governments are key factors for understanding the continued public ownership and institutional development of these SOEs. Canada's limited adoption of New Public Management concepts and neoliberalism, more generally, is an additional pertinent factor that helps to explain their continued presence in the economy as well as the relatively late implementation of modernization programs. Some final thoughts on the value of SOEs and state intervention more generally round out the article.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".