MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077828652 · doi:10.1017/s0008423906279988

From UI to EI: Waging the War on the Welfare State

2006· article· en· W2077828652 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel Béland

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetrenchmentWelfare statePolitical scienceSocial policyUnemploymentState (computer science)Welfare reformRestructuringPoliticsSocial WelfarePolitical economyWelfareLiberalismPublic administrationSociologyEconomicsEconomic growthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From UI to EI: Waging the War on the Welfare State , Georges Campeau (translated by Richard Howard), Vancouver: UBC Press, 2005, pp. xiii, 235. Over the last two decades, much has been published about welfare state retrenchment and restructuring. No consensus has yet emerged regarding the scope and nature of social policy change occurring during the era of neo-liberalism and economic globalization. On the one hand, scholars argue that powerful institutional legacies and vested interests prevent policy makers from “dismantling the welfare state” (e.g., Paul Pierson, Dismantling the Welfare State? Reagan, Thatcher and the Politics of Retrenchment , Cambridge University Press, 1994). On the other hand, a growing number of scholars recognize that, despite such institutional constraints, the combination of incremental change and path-departing reforms are reshaping major social programmes in advanced industrial societies. This is especially true as it concerns policies dealing with unemployment, which constitute a major target for neo-liberal “activation” (e.g., Robert H. Cox, “The Consequences of Welfare Reform: How Conceptions of Social Rights Are Changing,” Journal of Social Policy , 26(1) 1998: 1–16).

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political ScienceSame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207