MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084012247 · doi:10.1111/0952-1895.00129

Banishing Bureaucracy or Hatching a Hybrid? The CanadianFood Inspection Agency and the Politics of Reinventing Government

2000· article· en· W2084012247 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGovernance · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersCanadian Food Inspection Agency
KeywordsBureaucracyPoliticsAgency (philosophy)Public administrationStaffingGovernment (linguistics)MandateEconomicsBusinessPolitical scienceManagementSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is a means to overcoming long‐standing bureaucratic politics while attaining some major policy ends.Contrary to some of the new public management bravado of transforming the public sector, the CFIA is not a bureaucratic revolution in reshaping the Canadian State. Changes in scientific staffing, funding, and inspection have been more incremental than fundamental. Moreover, the CFIA is something less than the special and separate operating agency models discussed in the alternative service delivery literature in terms of autonomy and market orientation, but something more autonomous and entrepreneurial than traditional government departments. These organizational and managerial reforms are modest extensions providing a means for achieving economies and enhanced effectiveness in carrying out the mandate of safety, consumer protection, and market access for Canadian food, animal, plant, and forestry products.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.291 · 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