Public transport policy and performance: The results of a South African public opinion poll
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Public opinion plays a vital role in a democracy, as democracies are, by nature responsive to the people. In South Africa, public participation is entrenched in the Constitution. Despite this, the spate of service delivery protests in South Africa in recent years would appear to indicate that the government is out of touch with the opinions of the South African citizens. Public transport policy in South Africa is described by a number of documents, mainly the White Paper on National Transport Policy, Moving South Africa and, more recently, the National Development Plan. An annual survey of 1000 South Africans is conducted to gauge opinion on transport related matters. The purpose of this article was to compare the current public transport policies (as stated above) and the public opinion on public transport (as gauged by the survey) in order to determine the extent to which these are aligned. The results show that current public transport policy is relatively strongly aligned with the public transport needs of the South African population, however, concerns regarding public transport such as mobility, accessibility, affordability and safety have not yet to be addressed satisfactorily.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".