MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069136672 · doi:10.3138/ijcs.49.81

The Empowerment of Canadian Cities: Classic Canadian Compromise

2014· article· en· W2069136672 on OpenAlex
Joseph Garcea

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Canadian Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyCompromiseEmpowermentTransformative learningFlexibility (engineering)Public administrationGovernment (linguistics)Corporate governanceStatutory lawPolitical scienceEconomic growthBusinessSociologyLawEconomicsManagementFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article provides an overview and assessment of statutory reforms designed to empower Canadian cities during the past two decades. It reveals that toward that end, the reforms focused primarily on expanding each of the following: the authority and autonomy of cities in making bylaws, the authority and autonomy of cities in accessing and managing financial resources, and the requirements for some provincial government to consult and even enter into agreements with cities when enacting laws and regulations or undertaking initiatives that affect them. The article also reveals that although the reforms were substantial and significant for the empowerment of cities in many provinces, they were not highly transformative either in the level of authority and autonomy granted to cities or in their working relationships with provincial governments. Another finding is that despite the positive effects of many reforms, and because of some adverse effects of others, city and provincial officials suggest that some additional reforms are required to address problems that attenuate the capacity and flexibility of cities to provide good governance and management in the 21st century.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.280 · 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