MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984263189 · doi:10.1017/s0008423912000753

Must We All Be Paradigmatic? Social Investment Policies and Liberal Welfare States

2012· article· en· W1984263189 on OpenAlexaff
Linda A. White

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvestment (military)Political scienceWelfareWelfare stateSocial policyWelfare economicsHumanitiesSociologyEconomicsPoliticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract.This article examines whether current shifts in government spending on early childhood education and care (ECEC) and maternal employment-promoting policies such as maternity and parental leave reveal a paradigm shift toward a social investment strategy in liberal welfare states. It finds that while governments in liberal welfare states increasingly adhere to the rhetoric of social investment focused on lifelong learning and labour activation, their policies and programs exhibit so much variation in goals, instruments and settings related to the family, maternal employment and the child that it is difficult to claim that any new policy approach has taken hold that is indicative of a social investment “paradigm.” Instead, liberal welfare states appear to be becoming even more liberal—in terms of reliance on markets for delivery of social investment goals—at the same time as spending is increasing. Résumé.Cet article examine si les changements actuels des dépenses de gouvernement sur la première éducation d'enfance et le soin (ECEC) et les politiques promouvant emploi maternelles comme la maternité et le congé parental révèlent un changement de paradigme vers une stratégie sociale d'investissement dans les Etats-providences libéraux. Il constate que pendant que les gouvernements dans les Etats-providences libéraux adhèrent de plus en plus à la rhétorique d'investissement social s'est concentré sur l'apprentissage de toute une vie et l'activation de la main-d'œuvre, leurs politiques et programmes exposent tant de variation dans les buts, les instruments et les cadres rattachés à la famille, l'emploi maternel et l'enfant qu'il est difficile de réclamer que n'importe quelle nouvelle approche de politique a attrapé qui est indicatif “d'un paradigme” social d'investissement. Au lieu de cela les Etats-providences libéraux ont l'air de devenir encore plus libéraux – du point de vue de la dépendance aux marchés pour la livraison de buts sociaux d'investissement – en même temps comme les dépenses augmentent.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.024
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political ScienceSame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207