MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1795752311 · doi:10.18235/0010047

La viabilidad de las prácticas de participación ciudadana en la gestión municipal: El caso del presupuesto participativo de Villa El Salvador (Perú, 2000-2002)

2003· report· es· W1795752311 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Carlos Cortázar Velarde, Carla Lecaros

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsCanadian Council on International Law
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El estudio de caso pretende contribuir a una mejor comprensión de los procesos que hacen viables aquellas prácticas de participación ciudadana que requieren una elevada interacción con las organizaciones y funcionarios públicos. La experiencia estudiada consiste en el diseño y puesta en marcha del presupuesto participativo en el distrito de Villa El Salvador (Perú), entre el año 2000 e inicios del 2002. Villa El Salvador es un distrito popular del sur de la ciudad de Lima que comenzó a formarse en 1971 a partir de la ocupación informal de tierras por parte de pobladores pobres sin vivienda y que para 2003 contaba con poco más de trescientos mil habitantes. Con base en el análisis realizado, se propone al lector un conjunto de siete lecciones útiles para quienes están interesados en impulsar prácticas de participación ciudadana: i) articular participación y responsabilización, ii) emplear el reconocimiento ciudadano y la ampliación de roles como incentivos a la labor de los funcionarios, iii) prestar suficiente atención a los procesos de implementación, iv) generar las condiciones necesarias para el aprendizaje organizacional, v) institucionalizar los cambios, vi) minimizar aquellos procesos que compiten con los participativos y vii) fomentar y mantener el compromiso de los políticos electos.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPublic Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207