What Are Contemporary Rural Development Policies? A Pan-Canadian Content Analysis of Government Strategies, Plans, and Programs for Rural Areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au Canada, des débats de longue date ont lieu sur la manière de concevoir des politiques efficaces pour répondre aux besoins des diverses communautés rurales. Le présent article fait le point sur les politiques rurales canadiennes en procédant à une analyse globale du contenu des stratégies, des plans et des programmes des gouvernements provinciaux et territoriaux. Cette analyse révèle que bon nombre des critiques récurrentes concernant les politiques rurales restent pertinentes aujourd’hui, notamment le cloisonnement sectoriel, le manque d’intégration des politiques et la perception permanente des régions rurales comme étant des sites d’extraction détachés de l’investissement. Cette étude souligne également l’importance des approches en matière de politique émanant des territoires du Nord canadien qui démontrent des approches intégrées du développement économique rural.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".