Reassessing the contents and context of governance in Asia: recognizing achievements
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose Good governance has been declared as the key target of most Asian governments, but it appears to be an unattainable objective. The purpose of this paper is to explore the potentials for establishing governance across Asian countries. Drawing upon the literature and experience of Asian countries, the study argues that governance represents an unclear state that is rooted more in perception than reality. An extensive review of the indicators of governance reveals the anomaly and unorganized efforts to measure it, and points to the need for recognizing accomplishments in areas that are not directly or indirectly covered in the existing schemes of assessment. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on a broad review of the literature on governance and political systems in Asian countries. Existing arrangements for assessing governance are critically reviewed to point out the risks in a perception-dependent approach. Secondary sources and insight obtained from relevant research constitute the data analyzed in the paper. Findings The paper finds that the target of good governance cannot be fully achieved due to the significant diversity across Asian countries as well as varied perceptions held by assessors. Stakeholders have different perceptions about the requirements and ideal of governance and existing tools for measuring governance are inadequate. Most importantly, assessment frameworks do not recognize contextual dimensions that are relevant to Asian countries. Furthermore, it is important to recognize efforts that are aimed at improving conditions instead of working toward an absolute outcome of governance. Recognition of small successes will contribute to the improvement of circumstances rather than ranking countries on the basis of a limited number of perception-based indicators and listing them on international indices. Research limitations/implications The paper does not draw upon primary sources of information and is limited to an assessment of existing arrangements. Practical implications The paper will help draw attention to the limitations of existing arrangements of assessing countries and ranking them for the quality of governance. It will also encourage researchers to think about alternative tools for assessing governance and recognizing progress in Asian countries. Social implications The paper will encourage governments to identify obstacles to good governance and adopt policies to overcome them. Originality/value The paper contributes to the literature presenting a critical view for encouraging alternative approach to governance, incorporating perceptions of diverse stakeholders and highlights the need to recognize progress, however limited, in all areas.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle