L'expérience québécoise en matière de réforme administrative: la loi sur l'administration publique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sommaire: Cet article porte sur l'expérience concrète de réforme administrative conduite dans la fonction publique québécoise depuis le printemps 2000. Afin de comprendre les raisons qui expliquent l'entrée relativement tardive et plutôt modeste du Québec dans la nouvelle vague de réformes administratives, nous presentons dans une première section l'arrière‐plan historique de la réforme québécoise. Puis, prenant appui sur les résultats empiriques de deux recherches réalisées l'une en 2003 et l'autre en 2005, les trois sections suivantes examinent la façon dont la réforme québécoise a répondu aux principaux enjeux touchant les aspects conceptuel et stratégique d'une réforme. Nous traitons d'abord les enjeux suivants concernant la conception d'ensemble de la réforme: la prise en compte des spécificités de la gestion publique, l'application d'une approche différenciée en fonction des paramètres structuraux et le respect de la dynamique du système administratif national. Sont ensuite abordés les enjeux ayant trait à la mise en œuvre de la réforme: l'engagement des acteurs, les modes d'intervention des organismes centraux et les ressources allouées. On examine enfin quelques enjeux reliés aux deux axes majeurs retenus par la réforme: le service aux citoyens et aux entreprises et la gestion par résultats. Abstract: This article looks at the concrete experience of the administrative reforms that have been conducted in the Quebec public service since spring 2000. In order to understand the reasons why Quebec was relatively late in joining the new wave of administrative reform, and rather modest in its participation when it did so, the first section of the article documents its historical background. The next three sections examine the way in which the Quebec reform has addressed the key issues related to the conceptual and strategic aspects of the reform process, based on the empirical results of two research studies, conducted in 2003 and 2005. Examined first are issues concerning the overall vision of reform: the taking into account of the specifics of public management, the application of a differentiated approach based on structural parameters, and the respect for the dynamics of the national administrative system. The article then looks at issues relating to reform implementation: the engagement of the players, the modes of intervention of the central agencies, and the resources allocated. Finally, the article examines some of the issues in connection with the two major themes targeted by the reform: services to citizens and businesses, and management by results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".