MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413851437 · doi:10.46827/ejmms.v10i2.2009

A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF CANADA'S DIGITAL GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES AND LESSONS FROM ABROAD

2025· article· en· W4413851437 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Houssem Eddine Ben Messaoud

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Management and Marketing Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Digital governmentPolitical scienceRegional scienceGeographyDigital transformation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada's digital transformation within government sectors faces significant challenges, including outdated technologies, limited financial resources, staff resistance, and cybersecurity concerns, which collectively impede the delivery of efficient public services. Despite increasing budget allocations, underutilization and skill shortages continue to slow progress. Comparatively, countries like Australia, South Korea, and Estonia have demonstrated successful digital government initiatives through decisive leadership, citizen-centric service design, robust cybersecurity, and strategic investments in AI and broadband infrastructure. Key success drivers include strong governmental leadership, public-private partnerships, continuous training, and transparent user engagement. Canada's performance measurement relies on key indicators such as service speed, user satisfaction, and cost savings, with notable successes like the Canada Revenue Agency's online tax filing system. However, challenges remain in enhancing internet access in remote areas and strengthening cybersecurity. By learning from international examples and focusing on strategic investments, skill development, and user-centered approaches, Canada can accelerate its digital government transformation to improve service delivery, increase public trust, and achieve operational efficiencies. Article visualizations:

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0130.037
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Management and Marketing StudiesSame topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207