The State of the Social Investment State in the Field of Employment Policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article takes issue with a simple history of welfare regimes that divides the post-1945 years into a golden age and an era of retrenchment. Rather, we claim that it is more appropriate to describe three moments in liberal welfare regimes. Essential to this reconceptualisation is the observation of a gradual introduction, since the middle of the 1990s, of new social policies that move beyond the realm of “cuts.” They provide new visions of welfare and delineate novel parameters of social discourse and action. We term this the moment of the Social Investment State in liberal welfare regimes. The Social Investment State is not simply guided by neo-liberal precepts, nor is it even simply a reworking of Thatcherite policies. Instead it is a new form of welfare. In order to understand how the recent period (1995- 2003) can be distinguished from the period of austerity (1980-1995), this article presents in chronological order the reform of the principal instruments of employment policy used in Canada and the United Kingdom. This new model of welfare, however, is not necessarily without negative effects; the Social Investment State leaves many groups without protection.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".