MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W321525473 · doi:10.3138/jcs.35.4.142

The Contested Terrain of Canadian Public Administration in Canada's Third Century

2000· article· en· W321525473 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Allan Tupper

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic administrationGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsPublic servicePanacea (medicine)AccountabilityGeneral partnershipNew public managementPublic sectorPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay examines the impact of "new public management" on the Canadian public service. It argues that, without much public debate, the principles by which the public service operates changed dramatically in the 1980s and 1990s. New public management is a complex set of ideas about the political, economic and organizational bases of modem society. It prescribes flexible organizations that seek business efficiency and greater responsiveness to citizen interests, and assumes that government services need not be delivered by governments themselves. It envisions a "partnership" society. New public management has been adopted by Canadian governments as they struggle to balance their budgets; however, its application has redefined government accountability and raised questions about the capacity of governments to deliver services in the third millennium. More robust finances are no panacea for Canada's public services. The impact of e-government, restaffing and debate about the role of government will generate demands for continuing administrative reform.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0380.025
Scholarly communication0.0190.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations18
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicPublic Policy and Administration ResearchFrench-language works237,207