Integration of gender-based analysis in government processes: Canadian experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to study the Canadian experience of new approaches development for integration of gender-based analysis into the government activities on the federal, provincial and municipal levels. Gender-based analysis is one of the main tools of gender mainstreaming in Canada. The paper analyzes new approaches and definitions of the term «gender-based analysis», which became the result of conceptual shifts in the understanding of the nature of gender-based analysis by several jurisdictions in Canada. It is considered a variety of practical tools – checklists, gender lenses, questions, graphs and specific cases – which are geared specifically toward a specific technical specialization of government agencies in Canada. It is noted that these tools are offered within the methods developed to link gender-based analysis to the functions of government performance. The conclusion is that Canada is a world leader not only in the use of gender-based analysis in the process of public policymaking, but further improvement of the practical tools, and expanding its scope.
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 | 0.016 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.055 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".