Unpacking the Role of Neoliberalism on the Politics of Poverty Reduction Policies in Ontario, Canada: A Descriptive Case Study and Critical Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper employs a descriptive case study method to analyze and critically review the emergence of the provincial poverty reduction strategy in Ontario, Canada which was implemented in 2008 and renewed in 2014. The purpose of this study is two-fold: first, it defines the principles of neoliberalism and explores the historical growth of neoliberal thought in Canada, and specifically within Ontario, beginning in the 1980s to the present-day. Drawing on a combination of primary, secondary and grey literature, this paper discusses the ways in which neoliberal ideologies and rhetoric became deeply rooted in political thought and discourse within the province. Employing a critical theory framework, the paper highlights the contrasting ways in which neoliberal values were adopted by the different political parties in power and the detrimental impact this espousal had on individuals living in poverty within Ontario. Second, the paper illustrates the powerful ways in which anti-poverty grassroots movements and social advocacy groups assembled to push for the creation of a provincial poverty reduction strategy. The analysis ends with a critique of the neoliberal influences on the strategy’s recommendations and the future outlook of the poverty reduction strategy based on the current political climate within the province.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".