MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990030747 · doi:10.1177/1468018106065366

The Social Economy and the American Model Relating New Social Policy Directions to the Old

2006· article· en· W1990030747 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter Graefe

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Social Policy · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeoliberalism (international relations)Social policySocial economyPolitical economyPower (physics)Field (mathematics)EconomyState (computer science)Order (exchange)Political scienceJurisdictionEconomic systemEconomicsSociologyMarket economyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article seeks to untangle how the new vocabulary of the ‘social’ relates to the ‘American model’ of neoliberalization that was taken up by national elites across the West and many parts of the South in the 1980s and 1990s. It does so by focusing on one new field of policy (the social economy) in one jurisdiction (Québec) in order to uncover the different social economy projects being put forward, and to emphasize how these projects each had global linkages. In particular, the article will look at how the women’s movement, social democratic intellectuals and centres of power within the state each related to distinct bodies of global thinking on the social economy. This in turn translated into three distinct means of relating the social economy to neoliberalism, ranging from seeking to countervail it, through to attempts to flank it, to attempts to roll it out further.

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)0.004
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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.077
Scholarly communication0.0100.010
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations23
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Social PolicySame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207