MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207280407 · doi:10.1111/padm.12791

Why create government corporations? An examination of the determinants of corporatization in the Canadian public sector

2021· article· en· W3207280407 on OpenAlex

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

VenuePublic Administration · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporatizationPublic sectorPopularityGovernment (linguistics)Public administrationBusinessPublic managementIdeologyNew public managementState (computer science)OutsourcingPublic relationsPoliticsPolitical scienceEconomicsMarket economyEconomyMarketingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Public corporations have grown in popularity over the last 30 years, but the conditions that lead governments to create them are still debated. In this study, we draw on an original dataset of public organizations at the federal and provincial levels in Canada to test the prevalence of corporatization and the conditions associated with the creation of public corporations. Our results show that corporatization has been an important phenomenon in Canada over the last 30 years, but that the creation of public corporations is not associated with pressures on public finances or favored by right‐wing governments. Our main finding is that the creation of public corporations is mainly associated with administrative capacity. Our results suggest that corporatization may be more a pragmatic exercise in state‐building than an ideological or New Public Management (NPM)‐driven project, but that its cost or complexity may make it more accessible to larger administrations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.245 · 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