Une nouvelle culture émergente ? L'évaluation du positionnement des groupes d'intérêt anglophones face au Cadre stratégique agricole canadien de 2007*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé. Cet article présente une analyse de texte innovatrice, à l'aide d'outils quantitatif et qualitatif, des mémoires anglophones déposés par les groupes d'intérêt au ministère de l'Agriculture et Agroalimentaire Canada lors des consultations reliées au cadre stratégique Cultivons l'avenir en 2007. Nous observons une multiplication des acteurs intéressés par les politiques publiques de ce secteur et un éclatement de leurs discours, qui ne s'articulent plus seulement autour du protectionnisme agricole. Nos résultats signalent une forte fragmentation des débats agricoles, certains groupes favorisant une libéralisation accrue, d'autres défendant la reconnaissance de la multifonctionnalité de l'agriculture. Face à cette polarisation, l'analyse lexicographique du Cadre stratégique canadien indique que le gouvernement affiche une position d'équilibre entre ces discours contrastés, tout en recourant à un argumentaire manifestement en faveur d'une plus grande libéralisation de l'agriculture. Abstract. This article uses quantitative and qualitative instruments to present an innovative content analysis of the English-language briefs presented by interest groups to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada during the 2007 consultations for the Growing Forward policy framework. Our analysis shows a proliferation in the number of actors interested in agricultural public policy as well as a diversification of their discussions, which are no longer structured solely around the idea of agricultural protectionism. Our results indicate that stakeholders' objectives in agriculture are highly fragmented, with some groups promoting an increased liberalization and other stakeholders strongly defending the recognition of the multifunctionality of agriculture. Considering these disparate pressures, the lexicographic analysis of the Canadian policy framework indicates that the Canadian government takes a balanced position between these contrasted interests while, nevertheless, putting forward arguments that are clearly in favour of greater agricultural liberalization.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".