Wither Ontario’s Environment? Neo-Conservatism and the Decline of the Environment Ministry.” Canadian Public Policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Une série de coupures dans le budget du Ministère de l’Environement de l’Ontario (MEO) durant les années 90 l’ont laissé avec moins de ressources au tournant du siècle qu’il en contrôlait dans le milieu des années 70 lorsque le ministère a été crée. Cet article passe en revue l’impact de ces coupures sur le mandat du ministère ainsi que sur sa structure organisationelle. Il met également en évidence que la pression du public et les modèles politiques offrent une bonne explication de la majeure partie du développement historique du ministère. Par contre, ces évidences ne peuvent expliquer les récentes coupures drastiques ainsi que les réductions de personnel. Les idéologies néo-conservatrices du gouvernement conservateur de Mike Harris sont plutôt responsables des réductions majeures de la fin des années 90. A series of sharp cuts to the Ontario Ministry of Environment’s (MOE) budget in the 1990s have left it with fewer resources at the turn of the century than it controlled in the mid-1970s when the ministry was first created. This paper reviews the impact of those cuts on the ministry’s mandate and organizational structure, and argues that public pressure and party politics models offer a good explanation for most of the ministry’s historical development, but an insufficient account of the more recent drastic cuts and downsizing. Rather, the neo-conservative ideology of Premier Mike Harris ’ Conservative government accounts for the major retrenchment of the late 1990s.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".