Creating the Public Services Market
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction A key challenge for central government in implementing the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) to liberalise public services when it came into effect in 1996 was to find a way of market making. It would be difficult to open public services to competition where there had been no private sector engagement before. In some public services, there had been little external provision. Introducing change and potential for opening internal processes to competition meant that private sector contractors would have to be attracted to establishing a capability to bid for this work (Walsh, 1995; Héritier, 2001). This was particularly in relation to professional and specialist functions in local and central government such as building control, finance, legal services and planning. In some services, it was possible to transfer skills between the public and private sectors very readily, such as human resources, although there continued to be differences in the cultural context of the public sector (Harris, 2008). In other local authority services, the development of private sector markets was encouraged through changes in regulation such as planning (Adams and Tiesdell, 2010; RTPI, 2019). There were also challenges about the ways public bodies defined their activities, attributed costs and were managed. The role of performance management regimes was central to creating these markets in specifying what should be done and how it would be delivered, priced and measured (Bovaird and Gregory, 1996). In many cases, there was a need for new market making such as in building control. The deregulation of building control was common across a number of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries including in the EU, Australia and Canada (Meijer and Visscher, 2006; Van der Heijden, 2010). In the UK, following the Building Act 1984, an independent provider of building control regulators, the National Housing and Building Council (NHBC), established a subsidiary company in 1985 to employ ‘approved inspectors’. Up to this point all building control had been undertaken by professional qualified inspectors employed by local authorities. The NHBC building control professionals became the preferred inspectors for many private sector development companies and their role was highlighted in the Grenfell Fire tragedy (Hodkinson, 2019).
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,015 | 0,017 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,018 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,009 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,146 | 0,019 |
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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».