MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W914108766 · doi:10.1177/073491490603000203

E-Government and Local Governance in Canada: An Examination of Front Line Challenges and Federal Tensions

2006· article· en· W914108766 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeffrey Roy

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Administration Quarterly · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLocal Government Finance and Decentralization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFront linePublic administrationCorporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)Local governmentFront (military)Political scienceLine (geometry)LawManagementEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to examine the impacts of e-government in Canada on both inter-governmental relations and local governance. The rationale for such an examination stems from the emergence, over the past decade of two parallel discourses in public sector and governance reform: first, e-government as primarily a set of national and provincial strategies for public sector reforms, and secondly, a discourse has focused on the rising importance of municipal government and local governance systems. The main problem at present remains the absence of more holistic thinking on the need for a new enterprise, federated architecture for collaboration that entails an overhaul of the existing political arrangements of the federation. An additional lesson to draw at present is that the weak status and limited capacities of Canada's municipalities, a concern predating e-government's emergence, risk amplification as a governance handicap for both individual communities and the country in adapting to a more digital age. However, the consequences of the weakness also depend on how provincial and federal governments respond to the erosion of public trust by adapting their own structures, as well as the effectiveness of emerging top-down mechanisms being deployed to strengthen the infrastructure of cities and communities.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.839

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0340.009
Scholarly communication0.0120.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations24
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Administration QuarterlySame topicLocal Government Finance and DecentralizationFrench-language works237,207