MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2254411226

Prisons that Empower. Neo-liberal Governance in Canadian Women's Prisons

2000· article· en· W2254411226 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kelly Hannah‐Moffat

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentPoliticsPower (physics)Corporate governanceImprisonmentGovernmentalityState (computer science)Political sciencePublic administrationSociologyGovernment (linguistics)LawManagementEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses recent policy changes in Canadian women's imprisonment to examine the emergence of neo-liberal strategies of penal governing. The first section critically assesses the claim that new strategies of crime control involve a reconfiguration of the responsibilities of state and civil society. In the second section, the logic and interpretive politics of empowerment strategies are evaluated. An emphasis is placed on how 'empowerment', a term previously associated with radical activists and social movements, is now as easily used by the Correctional Service of Canada to legitimate and justify the construction of a regime at five new regional prisons for women. This article reflexively examines the feminist and Aboriginal knowledges that contributed to the construction of empowerment as a legitimate and viable penal reform strategy; and it shows how feminist and Aboriginal reformers' notions of empowerment can be aligned with very different political rationalities and used as a strategy of responsibilization by policy makers and correctional officials. In particular, it shows how these knowledges get linked to penal power and used to create a new regime of governing and reinforce pre-existing relations of power. Finally, a discussion of the reassertion of sovereign and disciplinary power, when it comes to governing those who fail to take responsibility for their own empowerment is provided to show how neo-liberal strategies of government develop alongside, and operate in conjunction with, other forms of power.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations96
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207