Coordinating cross-sector partnerships for water provision in Malawi
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Subject area Public sector management, stakeholder management, collaboration and strategy. Study level/applicability Undergraduate (final-year) or master's-level students (Master in Public Administration, Master in Management). Designed for courses in nonprofit management, public administration and/or international development. Can also be used in any course, such as strategic management, sustainable development or corporate social responsibility, that covers stakeholder theory, or stakeholder management as a topic. Case overview Decentralization has changed the way core services are delivered to local populations in sub-Saharan Africa. This in turn has forced nongovernmental organizations, international aid agencies, corporations and other development partners to change the way they engage with government in their shared efforts to help improve the living conditions of people living under the threshold of poverty in this and other parts of the world. This modular ethnographic teaching case uses the specific example of the water sector in Malawi to help highlight the complexity of multiple stakeholder relations in an international development context. Expected learning outcomes Upon completion of this case, students should be able to: identify and understand the different goals and issues that individual stakeholders in cross-sector partnerships are dealing with; identify and understand the power/control dynamics at play in these relationships; analyse the advantages and disadvantages associated with different ways of coordinating multi-stakeholder partnerships; and develop recommendations for structuring multi-stakeholder relationships in developing and emerging markets that balance efficient service provision with concern for individual stakeholder priorities. Supplementary materials Teaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it