Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2013, the government abolished the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), which had been Canada’s flagship foreign aid agency for decades, and transferred its functions to the newly renamed Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD). As the government is rethinking Canadian aid and its relationship with other foreign policy and commercial objectives, the time is ripe to rethink Canadian aid more broadly. Edited by Stephen Brown, Molly den Heyer and David R. Black, this is the first book on Canadian foreign aid since CIDA was folded into DFATD. Designed to reach a variety of audiences, contributions by twenty-one scholars and experts in the field offer an incisive examination of Canada’s record and recent changes in Canadian foreign aid, such as its focus on maternal and child health and on the extractive sector. Many chapters also ask more fundamental questions concerning the intersection of the moral imperative that underpins aid and the trend towards greater self-interest. For instance, what are and what should be the underlying motives of Canadian aid? How compatible are altruism and self-interest in foreign aid? To what extent should aid be integrated with Canada’s other policies and practices? The portrait that emerges is a sobering one. This book is essential reading for anyone interested in Canada’s changing role in the world and how it reflects on Canada.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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 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".