MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096875101

Federalism and Public Responsiveness to Policy

2016· article· en· W7096875101 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismDecentralizationPublic policyPublic opinionRepresentation (politics)Government (linguistics)Politics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public responsiveness to government policy is a crucial component of representative democracy, but may be far weaker in federal regimes.This article explores the consequences of federalism for public responsiveness in one highly federalized policy domain: welfare spending in Canada. Results suggest that citizens’preferences for spending at the federal level are affected by changes in both federal and provincial spending, and to an equal degree; they suggest, in short, that federalism poses serious problems where public responsiveness is concerned. A concluding section considers the implications of these findings for the representation of public opinion in policy in federalized states. Recent years have seen an increase in federalism and other forms of decentralization worldwide (see, e.g., Garrett and Rodden 2003). This increase has political and sociological explanations. It has many possible consequences as well, some of which are considered to be beneficial. One of these—indeed, a critical one—is that federal institutions improve the representation of the public in government. There are good reasons to believe that federalism does enhance representation, to be sure. But there also are reasons to believe that it attenuates the relationship between public opinion and policy. Effective policy representation presupposes public responsiveness to policy itself; that is, it presupposes that the public effectively notices what policymakers actually do. There are two reasons. First, public responsiveness provides an important motivation for politicians to represent public preferences: a monitoring public. Second, public responsiveness makes public inputs into the policy process meaningful for policymakers: it allows for informed public preferences. Representative democracy thus depends on public responsiveness to policy. The stronger the public responsiveness, the greater the basis for representation. By corollary, weaker public responsiveness will tend to weaken representative democracy.1 It is through this lens that the current article addresses federalism

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207