L'influence du Bureau d'aménagement de l'Est du Québec dans le développement de l'administration publique québécoise<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sommaire : En 1963, le ministère de l'Agriculture du Québec mandate le Bureau d'aménagement de l'Est du Québec (BAEQ) afin de réaliser une expérience inédite : l'élaboration d'un plan directeur d'aménagement pour les territoires pilotes du Bas‐St‐Laurent, de la Gaspésie et des Îles‐de‐la‐Madeleine. Le BAEQ sollicitera la participation active des populations concernées afin d'étayer le rapport qu'il entend soumettre au gouvernement, pour atténuer l'écart socio‐économique qui sépare l'Est du Québec du reste de la «Belle province». Les travaux scientifiques portant sur le BAEQ auront été fort prolifiques jusqu'au milieu des années 1980. Depuis lors, la communauté scientifique boude cet objet de recherche, comme si un verdict irrévocable avait été rendu à son égard. Le BAEQ aurait été le plus retentissant échec de la Révolution tranquille, le prototype de la dérive technocratique, l'illustration de la faillite de la planification centralisée du développement. Une relecture du BAEQ nous permet pourtant d'apprécier comment cette expérimentation politique laisse en héritage des innovations sociales qui, au fils du temps, se sont institutionnalisées dans les méthodes de l'État. Vu sous cet angle, le BAEQ offre un nouveau visage : celui d'une étape cruciale dans l'histoire de l'administration publique québécoise, dont les retombées ont profondément transformé la logique du développement territorial au Québec. Abstract : In 1963, the ministère de l'Agriculture du Québec directed the Eastern Quebec planning bureau (Bureau d'aménagement de l'Est du Québec – BAEQ) to accomplish an unprecedented task: to create a Master Development Plan for the pilot territories in the Lower St. Lawrence, Gaspé and Îles‐de‐la‐Madeleine regions. The plan was innovative in its preparation, through both the philosophy that shaped it and its methodology. In fact, the BAEQ appealed for the active participation of the communities directly affected to support the report it planned to submit to the government, to lessen the socio‐economic disparities between Eastern Quebec and the rest of “La Belle Province.” The BAEQ completed the project in June 1966, with the submission of a substantial report published in ten volumes and containing more than two hundred recommendations, including several proposals for a major reconfiguration of the political and economic framework in Eastern Quebec. The BAEQ was extremely prolific in its academic writings until the mid‐1980s. Since then, sociologists, anthropologists and political scientists seem to have turned a blind eye to this research subject, as if an irrevocable verdict had been rendered against it. The BAEQ seems to have been the biggest failure of the Quiet Revolution, the prototype of the technocratic drift, the illustration of the failure of centralized development planning, and the embodiment of the government's lack of responsiveness towards citizens' demands. And yet, when we re‐examine the BAEQ, we can now appreciate how this political experimentation left behind a legacy of social innovations that, over the years, have become an integral part of the government's processes. From this perspective, the BAEQ is seen in a different light : it is a crucial step in the history of public administration in Quebec, the direct and indirect fallout of which has profoundly re‐shaped the logistics of territorial development in Quebec.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".