The Policy Analytical Capacity of the Government of Quebec: Results from a Survey of Officials
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article complements the work of Howlett et al. on the capacity of Canadian governments for public policy-making. The new public management wave was driven by the notion of a need for improved service delivery to the population. A number of authors, including Metcalfe, pointed out that the government was then neglecting management in favour of "policy advice." It was fashionable to show interest in policy but not in management. After decades spent seeking greater efficiency, have we gone too far in the other direction? Do governments have the capacity to develop public policy? Have those responsible for developing public policy received the training they require? This article addresses the Quebec portion of a set of Canada-wide surveys on the capacity for public policy-making. It complements the earlier analyses by presenting the results of a survey conducted among public servants in Quebec. We place particular emphasis on education and the training of the public servants who work on developing and formulating public policy.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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 it