Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the growing literature on the policy impact of ideas and related cultural and discursive processes by exploring the historical embeddedness of the idea of solidarity in French social policy debates. Design/methodology/approach This paper adopts a qualitative, historical approach that traces the development of – and the relationship between – policy ideas and social programs over time. Findings First, exploring the work of reformer and politician Léon Bourgeois, the paper investigates the emergence of this concept in nineteenth and early twentieth century France. Second, analyzing the work of centrist scholar and intellectual Pierre Rosanvallon, the paper studies the French debate on solidarity and welfare state reform in the late 1980s and 1990s. Originality/value At the broadest level, this paper shows that contemporary social policy debates are grounded in long‐term historical as well as cultural processes and repertoires. Policy ideas that acquire the status of culturally resonant “keywords” can have a long history, and tracing their development is necessary to illuminate the role of ideas in contemporary social policy change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".