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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: In this paper, I focus on the contribution of the social economy to the democratization of the State and of public policy by making use of the distinction between the concepts of co‐production and co‐construction. In part one, I clarify the meanings given to various concepts. In particular, I pay attention to the idea of a co‐production of public policy. This concept relates to the organizational dimension of policy and enables a contextualization of the participation of both civil society stakeholders and market forces in the implementation of services to the public. In part two, I discuss the concept of co‐construction which relates to the institutional dimension of public policy and enables an analysis of how both civil society stakeholders and market forces are defining public policies. While the co‐construction of public policy can produce various types of outcomes, I favor a solidarity‐based model in which the State is open to forms of governance inclusive of the contributions of civil society stakeholders and market forces. This type of co‐construction is fitting with a concern for the general interest and is ready to use the resources of the social economy. In part three, I review the housing policy case study in Canada and Quebec during the last twenty years. Three observations emerge from this case study: 1) the presence of both co‐production and co‐construction in public housing policy; 2) an active presence of the social economy such as co‐operatives and non‐profit organizations; 3) this active presence of the social economy has helped to produce a number of social innovations that have improved the democratization of public policy in the housing field.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it