MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1506034228 · doi:10.15353/joci.v4i2.2955

E-Governance in the Developing World in Action

2008· article· en· W1506034228 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Arjan de Jager, Victor van Reijswoud

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransparency (behavior)Corporate governanceE-governanceGovernment (linguistics)Information and Communications TechnologyBusinessOrder (exchange)Process (computing)Action (physics)Developing countryPublic administrationPublic relationsProcess managementGood governancePolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomicsComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E-Governance is a powerful tool for bringing about change to government processes in the developing world. E-governance operates at the cross roads between Information and Communication Technology and government processes, and can be divided into three overlapping domains: e-administration, e-services and e-society. In order to be successful, e-governance must be firmly embedded in the existing government processes, must be supported, both politically and technically, by the governments, and must provide users with reasons to use these on-line domains. In order to maximize the impact, process change needs to be considered part and parcel of e-governance. In this report, we present and evaluate an e-governance programme in the East African country of Uganda. The programme, DistrictNet, tries to provide transparency at the local government level and to improve the provision of public information through the implementation of ICT. DistrictNet started in 2002 and is on-going. The achievements of the programme are presented and evaluated according to the criteria of the three domains of e-governance and their impact on government processes. On the basis of this evaluation, we elicit lessons that can be used to guide similar programmes at the local government levels in the developing world.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.369
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.063 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Community InformaticsSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207