Place Matters and Multi-Level Governance: Perspectives on a New Urban Policy Paradigm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
there is “no question that the path to Canada’s future runs through municipal governments large and small, urban and rural ” (Girard, 2003) This article takes stock of the recent explosion of interest in Canada’s cities, exploring the factors driving the new urban agenda, and the strategies needed to build healthy vibrant cities. Observing that Canada has become an urban policy laggard in the last decade or so, we consider possible lessons for moving ahead from recent developments in the European Union and the United States. In the 1990s, both of these jurisdictions experimented with novel forms of multi-level governance to tackle increasingly complex and localized public policy challenges. Paradoxes of Globalization The attention now being paid to cities is somewhat surprising. The burst of ‘techno-enthusiasm’ that initially accompanied globalization and the information revolution led many observers to predict the demise of cities as factors of production dispersed across the landscape freed from the constraints of geography (Cairncross, 1997). But researchers now track a convergence of three flows – people, commerce, and policy – positioning cities as the strategic places in the global age (Gertler, 2001). In Canada, nearly 80 percent of the population lives in cities, with fully 51
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".