The Politics of Early Years and Family Policy Investments in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The chapter examines the North American variant of social investment, focusing on early years and family policy investments in the United States and Canada. Political, economic, and institutional factors differentiate both countries from European and even other liberal welfare states. These include a policy paradigm rooted in a liberal welfare state tradition, an electoral system governed by single-member plurality voting that has historically permitted largely centrist-conservative governments to win elected office, a largely two-party and increasingly ideologically polarized party system in the United States (and a more moderate two-party-plus system in Canada), and decentralized decision-making under federalism. The chapter also examines the key factors that contribute to variation between and within Canada and the United States including Québec exceptionalism, stronger social democratic party influence in Canada, along with more influential civil society actors including organized labor unions, women’s groups, and childcare advocacy organizations. In the United States, in contrast, the relatively weaker trade unions and the stronger conservative social movements and organized interests, including conservative family organizations, claim a large part of the policy space.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".