L'investissement politique du futur : un mode de légitimation et de gouvernement : une comparaison Bretagne, Pays de Galles, Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing use of spatialized, collaborative and mobilizing strategic anticipations as steps of the public policy process by the Regional Council of Brittany, the Welsh Government and the Government of Quebec can be seen as an investment, by these "intermediate" territorial powers, of a field hitherto monopolized by central States and national representatives: the promise of the future. In a context of reconfiguration of centralized Welfare State’s model, accentuated by the economic crisis and the debt crisis of the late 2000s, the central states' capacity and political legitimacy to guarantee territorial prosperity and the hope for a better future has subsided. Regional administrations - in a broad sense - are therefore investing this space now available to put forward a sub-national vision of the future and of the territory, both among the population and the partners of the public action. The strategic anticipation processes studied produce and reproduce discourses on the vision of the future and territory, on the meaning of public action and regional institutions. These narratives are all caracterized by a political investment of the future, that is to say, a political economy of time. The approach by the notion of political investment of the future therefore helps to achieve a better understanding of the making-process and governing-process of a political space. Spatialized projective narratives that we have been able to study articulate several dimensions of the legitimization process: a territory-making process, a community-making process, and a polity defining process. This research perspective helps to study several dimensions of change: the internal transformation of national political spaces, the international convergence of subnational public action, and finally the redistribution of political authority in changing Nation-States.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".