Stratarchical Party Organization and Party Finance in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Based on an examination of constitutional and other party documents, Canadian political parties have been described as stratarchically organized (Carty, 2002). We identify four models of internal party financial flows that correspond to different models of internal party organization. We then trace the financial flows into and within the four major Canadian political parties from 2004 to 2007 with a view to identifying the model of party organization that these flows indicate. Our evidence in some respects supports Carty's assertion that Canadian parties are stratarchically organized, but it also suggests that changes to the regulatory regime governing political finance have contributed to a centralization of power at the level of the national party and at the expense of candidates and local associations. This centralizing tendency is significant, as it may disrupt the bargain that underlies the stratarchical organization of Canadian parties. Résumé. À la lumière d'une revue des constitutions et de divers autres documents des partis politiques canadiens, ces derniers ont été décrits comme étant organisés de manière stratarchique (Carty, 2002). Nous dégageons quatre modèles de flux monétaires internes des partis qui correspondent à différents modèles d'organisation interne des partis politiques. Nous retraçons les entrées de fonds des quatre principaux partis politiques canadiens et leur distribution interne de 2004 à 2007 en vue d'identifier le modèle d'organisation de parti qui correspond à ces flux monétaires. Sous certains rapports, nos résultats appuient l'argument de Carty affirmant que les partis canadiens sont organisés de manière stratarchique, mais ils suggèrent aussi que les changements apportés au régime régulateur gouvernant le financement politique ont contribué à une centralisation du pouvoir au niveau national des partis et ce aux dépens des candidats et des associations locales. Cette tendance centralisatrice est importante, car elle peut rompre le compromis qui sous-tend l'organisation stratarchique des partis politiques canadiens.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".