Bibliographic record
Abstract
Policies and practices that foster government openness and citizen participation are widely recognised as important contributors to a robust democracy.The results of the OECD's first Trust Survey (2022) show that governments across the OECD are seen by many as unresponsive to public feedback and as providing insufficient opportunities to participate in policy making.The findings highlight that citizens care about having a government that offers access to government information, provides opportunities to engage in the policy-making process and responds to public feedback and demands.Canada is widely recognised as a global leader in the area of open government thanks to its cochairmanship of the Steering Committee of the OGP in 2018 -2019 and continued involvement as a Steering Committee member until 2023, as well as the country's highly developed open data and open information agenda, which includes practices such as the renowned Open Government Portal.To continue making progress towards an integrated open government agenda and, more specifically, to receive tailored advice on the design of the country's first-ever holistic open government strategy, the Canadian government requested the support of the OECD in identifying the strengths and opportunities for improvement of its current agenda to open up the government.The OECD Open Government Scan of Canada takes stock of past reform efforts, analyses the present scenario and shows a path for Canada to successfully design, implement, monitor and evaluate this open government strategy.The Scan provides an evidence-based assessment of the country's frameworks for and governance of open government reforms and their implementation against selected provisions of the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Open Government (2017).The Scan benefitted from more than 20 interviews with governmental and non-public stakeholders, data collected through questionnaires answered by the Federal government, and extensive desk research by the OECD Secretariat.The Scan finds that the adoption of a holistic federal open government strategy can indeed help Canada set a vision, objectives, and a narrative for its open government agenda in the medium and long term.In addition to opening the door for promoting more far-reaching governance mechanisms and tools, such as the country's first maturity models in the field of open government, the Strategy presents an opportunity to broaden Canada's understanding of open government.This means addressing citizen and stakeholder participation more, while also linking open government reforms more directly with improving citizens' trust in public institutions and strengthening democracy.The OECD Open Government Scan of Canada recommends concrete actions for Canada to consider in the short, medium and long term to strengthen the enabling environment for open government and to design a successful open government strategy.Ultimately, the recommendations aim to support Canada in the move towards a fully integrated open government ecosystem.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.065 | 0.012 |
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".