MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151432556 · doi:10.1080/03066150008438757

Academic populists, the informal economy and those benevolent merchants: Politics and income security reform in Newfoundland

2000· article· en· W2151432556 on OpenAlex
James Overton

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Peasant Studies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsPolitical sciencePolitical economyEconomyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Academic populists in Newfoundland are wont to celebrate the informal economy and even the system of merchant credit in the country — and, after 1949, Canadian province — as a kind of proto‐welfare state. Now, in an era of crisis in the fishing industry, mass unemployment and state retreat from responsibility for providing support for the poor and unemployed, the putative value of the old ‘moral economy’ of rural Newfoundland is being rediscovered by those who are promoting social policy reform. Their argument is that we should look to the informal economy to provide a degree of security for people in a future of diminished state support. This article outlines a critique of the populists which is theoretical, empirical and political.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.234 · 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