MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205390256 · doi:10.46692/9781847421463.012

Conclusion: what is the best way forward for the citizen’s stake?’

2006· other· en· W4205390256 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nick Pearce, Will Paxton, Stuart White

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Union Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLaw and economicsBusinessSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction As the principle of a citizen's stake becomes tentatively established in British social policy, and attracts attention from around the world, deep and searching questions inevitably arise. Three sets of questions may be distinguished: 1) The underlying social ideal . What broader social vision is the citizen’s stake connected with? The basic idea of the citizen's stake is compatible with a wide range of conceptions of the good society. This is why it draws support across the political spectrum. But once the principle is established, further development of policies like the Child Trust Fund (CTF) requires a clear view of the specific conception of the good society we wish to advance. 2) International relevance . It has been argued that while asset-based approaches might have some relevance for nations of ‘Anglo-Saxon’ capitalism (such as Britain, the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia), they have little relevance to continental Europe or other parts of the world. Is this fair comment? 3) Immediate actions . What immediate actions should policy makers take to shape future development of the CTF in particular and the citizen's stake more broadly? We now look at each of these questions in turn. Underlying social ideal What kind of society is the CTF meant to help create? We begin by locating the CTF in relation to a currently influential conception of the good society centred on a social investment paradigm . We then outline three further perspectives that offer challenges or modifications to this paradigm: libertarianism ; post-productivism (which we see as related to civic republicanism ); and egalitarianism . The social investment paradigm A major theme in centre-left thinking in recent years is that the state should seek not merely to assist those in need, but, where possible, to help people build their capacities so that they can be more selfsupporting. Spending to this end is not simply welfare, but a kind of investment. In Britain, this theme came into mainstream discussion with the report of the Commission on Social Justice in 1994, stressing the need to create an ‘Investor's Britain’ as opposed to a mere ‘Leveller’s Britain’ based on income redistribution (Commission on Social Justice, 1994).

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEuropean Union Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207