The evolution of the Canadian AIDS Society : a social movement organization as network, coalition and umbrella organization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents a history of the Canadian AIDS Society (CAS), which began as an informal network of 16 local AIDS Service Organizations (ASOs) in 1986 and grew to 120 member organizations by the time of the renewal of Phase III of the National AIDS Strategy in late 1998. There are two main objectives of the study: (1) to look at why the organizational forms of the collection of groups evolved as they did; (2) to examine the outcomes and effectiveness of these organizational forms for CAS and its member organizations. Interviews were conducted with founding members of CAS and later staff and activists. Members of a subsection of local General Service Organizations (GSOs) were interviewed regarding group relationships to CAS and involvement with other organizations in their communities. Documentary research on materials produced by CAS (now publicly available in the AIDS Committee of Toronto library) was carried out. Some documentation was also available for local organizations. The Globe and Mail index was used to research CAS national level work. This dissertation uses the concepts network, coalition and umbrella organization to develop an understanding of why CAS formalized and the positive and negative outcomes of this for member groups and the organization itself. The issues of insider/outsider organization, motivation, identity, framing and ideology are discussed in relation to their impact on both CAS and a subsection of member organizations. CAS developed as a network, coalition, and umbrella organization. This evolution was in response to the purpose and goals of CAS at a national level, Ottawa based representative of member organizations interacting with the government and gathering and producing information useful to local work. CAS became increasingly formalized over the period under study, seeking and gaining access to government and other elites, as at least a semi-insider organization.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".