Innovation vs inertia: Entrepreneurial governments in 21<sup>st</sup>‐century rural Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rural development in Alberta is a long‐standing challenge, with local communities and economies often stuck between economic cycles, fiscal largesse from the Provincial Government, and a historical pattern of conservative leadership that seeks to leave the private sector unimpeded. As a result, many rural communities now face significant economic, social, political, and ecological challenges that, while not unique to Alberta, are marked by only modest innovation and a tendency to return to previous developmental initiatives. This paper is focused upon identifying the common challenges facing municipal government in the province, but also accounting for the inertial dynamics within municipal politics. Drawing from qualitative data collected from rural municipalities, it seeks to situate contemporary adaptive economic strategies and initiatives within the dominant public ideology of the province. This paper argues that while reform initiatives undertaken in the province broadly align with pragmatic municipalism as a necessary response to decades of neoliberal austerity and inertia, that pragmatism is tempered by a provincial rationality that limits, rather than enhances, the likelihood of meaningful change. This rationality, and its effects, are explained through four fallacies: home rule, agency, the Golden Age, and homogeneity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".