Canadian Federalism and Change in Policy Attention: A Comparison with the United Kingdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Federal systems empower multiple policy actors from different levels of governments. For some scholars, the disagreements arising within such a diverse group of actors create policy stalemates. Others contend instead that new ideas are more likely to arise and diffuse from such a diverse group. This article is a contribution to this scholarly debate, proposing an original contribution on policy agendas. It argues that both perspectives are useful to understanding the dynamic of policy making within federal systems. Looking at change in policy attention in Canadian and British speeches from the throne, the article argues that federalism constrains change immediately following a party turnover in government. In the following years, however, federal arrangements encourage larger changes in policy attention than arrangements where power is centralized. Résumé. Les systèmes fédéraux rassemblent plusieurs acteurs politiques issus de différents niveaux de gouvernement. Pour certains chercheurs, l'existence de potentiels désaccords entre de tels décideurs est susceptible de créer des impasses politiques. D'autres soutiennent au contraire que les nouvelles idées sont plus susceptibles d'émerger et de se diffuser à partir d'un tel groupe diversifié. Cet article s'inscrit dans ce débat sur le fédéralisme et propose une contribution originale en termes de mise à l'agenda des politiques publiques. Il soutient que les deux perspectives sont nécessaires à la compréhension de la dynamique de l'élaboration des politiques au sein des systèmes fédéraux. En mesurant le changement de l'attention politique dans les discours du Trône canadiens et britanniques, l'article affirme que le fédéralisme freine le changement de politique immédiatement après un changement de parti au gouvernement. Au cours d'une législature, toutefois, les institutions fédérales encouragent de plus grands changements dans l'attention des politiques que dans des systèmes unitaires où le pouvoir est centralisé.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".