Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transfer of capital and expertise from industrial country donors to developing country recipients through Official Development Assistance (ODA) has been a noble but flawed means of promoting economic and social development and overcoming global poverty.The enterprise has had to contend with colossal human and biophysical challenges and vastly unequal relations of wealth and power.In addition, donor governments have undermined the effectiveness of their foreign aid by pursuing multiple and often conflicting objectives-political and commercial as well as humanitarian.Aid agencies have also been buffeted by internal conflicts and organizational constraints, as well as by pressures from elsewhere in government, from domestic business and other non-governmental interests, and from a shifting transnational discourse on development.Nonetheless, there have been successes as well as failures, and there are still manifest needs for non-market resource transfers to support the development efforts of the world's poorest peoples and countries.Aid and Ebb Tide examines Canada's mixed record in meeting those needs by reviewing the history of its development assistance program-from modest beginnings after the launch of the Colombo Plan in 1950, through provision of significant and comparatively generous resources to developing countries in the 1970s and 1980s, to a decline in the face of neo-liberalism and cutbacks in the 1990s.In particular, the book explores the politics, major policies, and organizational dynamics of the aid program.Publication coincides with the thirtieth anniversary of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), the organization chiefly responsible for designing and delivering Canada's ODA.Several themes recur throughout the study: interdepartmental conflict over aid policy and delivery, organizational and cultural changes within CIDA, motives and objectives of foreign aid, Canada's ODA volume and record in meeting international targets for resource transfers, choice of recipient countries, programming priorities, terms and conditions attached to development assistance, Canadian involvement in multilateral aid, CIDA's relations with its partners in the voluntary and business sectors, and efforts to strengthen public support for initiatives to promote international development.Focusing on these important themes for understanding and assessing Canada's performance as an aid donor, a comprehensive history of that experience fills an important gap in the already rich literature on Canada's Northxix
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.588 | 0.380 |
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".