Complexity in local stakeholder coordination: decentralization and community water management in Northern Ghana
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
Abstract Stakeholder coordination is a prominent theme in current development discourse. Experience with decentralization and community water management in northern Ghana highlights the complexities of coordinating stakeholders at the local level. In this case, roles and responsibilities must be clarified between legislated sub‐district structures on the one hand, and civic water groups on the other. This is especially important with regard to resolving which party should collect revenues and manage assets and expenditures in the water sector. The key mechanism for addressing these issues is the District Assembly, which is empowered under the decentralization law to coordinate stakeholders, both ‘horizontally’, across social actors, and ‘vertically’, between the national and sub‐district levels. While such local‐level dynamics are indeed complex and challenging, they are at the same time probably more amenable to at least medium‐term resolution than stakeholder competition issues at the national level. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it