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 OpenAlex
Arjan de Jager, Victor van Reijswoud

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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