The Roles of Independent Legislative Fiscal Institutions: a Multidisciplinary Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This thesis approaches the question of the roles that can be fulfilled by Independent Legislative Fiscal Institutions, and it does so in a multidisciplinary manner, through six independent but logically-connected research papers. Independent Legislative Fiscal Institutions (IFIs) represent an institution of ever greater practitioner and academic interest, but a fuller understanding of their roles, and therefore their purpose, is left wanting due to the dispersion of analysis surrounding them across three separate literatures: economics, political science, and governance. Each literature approaches the question of the roles of IFIs in a tangential manner as part of some broader inquiry, and they provide rationales for these fiscal institutions steeped in arguments specific to these literatures. However, there is still a need to validate those literature-specific arguments through further evidence; and the claim that drives this thesis is that, only through a fuller and multidisciplinary synthesis of these literatures, along with the incorporation of a new literature (public administration), can progress be made in contextualizing the roles of IFIs in a comprehensive manner. The need for such an inquiry arises because, given that there is scant explicit consideration of the roles of IFIs, the ambiguities in their roles can and does incite severe budgetary conflicts. As such, the thesis develops multiple case studies to typologize the suggested roles, including: the United States, Canada, Australia, Fiji, and Iraq. In particular, the thesis identifies two types of roles for IFIs, as either (1) mechanistic-costing or (2) normative-advisory, and musters public value theory (from the public administration literature) to do so. Using the same public value lens, the thesis then proceeds to outline the limitations of its typologized roles, by indicating where the ingredients for both roles may be possible and yet where IFIs can still fall short of fulfilling them. Beyond that, the thesis aims to develop an understanding of special, context-specific roles for IFIs that can emerge in unique budgeting contexts, including as a ‘coordination mechanism’ within the broader accountability architecture (using Fiji), and as a vehicle for jumpstarting accountability in the budget process where fiscal architecture has been destroyed (using Iraq). The thesis thereby makes a series of multidisciplinary research contributions by (1) identifying the three relevant literatures that tangentially explore the roles of IFIs in terms of their localized (single-discipline) logic, (2) synthesizing their findings to provide an overarching context for the study of possible institutional roles, (3) introducing a new literature (public administration) that fills an important gap in understanding these institutions, (4) advancing two debates within public administration using IFIs (‘public value theory’ and the ‘politics-administration dichotomy’), (5) typologizing two roles for IFIs, and then delineating their limitations, (6) analysing two other unique roles that these institutions can fulfil in specific contexts (‘coordination mechanism and ‘ab initio fiscal body’), (7) highlighting practitioner interests in designing and successfully operating IFIs, and (8) identifying future areas of research that can build upon the multidisciplinary approach that this thesis develops.
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 | 0,025 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,009 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,020 |
| Communication savante | 0,019 | 0,020 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,011 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
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 ».