Reshaping Public Sector Accounting: An International Comparative View
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The aim of this paper is to study the governmental accounting transformations carried out in 16 member countries of the Organization for Economic Coordination and Development (OECD) and the European Community, taking the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) as a benchmark. To carry out the study we have used the de facto information disclosed by central government financial reports. The study shows that between the extremes of cash and full accrual accounting the countries studied have put numerous intermediate variants into practice. Accrual accounting developments seem more related to New Public Management (NPM) initiatives than to the cultural categories studied. Résumé L'objectif de cet article est d'etudier les transformations effectuees dans la comptabilite publique dans 16 pays de I'OCDE (Organisation de cooperation et de developpement economiques) et des Communautes europeennes en prenant comme reference I'International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS). Pour mener a bien I'etude, nous avons employe I'information de fait revelee par les rapports financiers du gouvernement central. L'etude prouve qu'entre la methode de la comptabilite de caisse et la comptabilite d'exercice pour toutes les operations, les pays etudies ont mis en place de nom‐breuses variantes intermediaires. Les developpements de la comptabilite en creances et dettes semblent etre plus en relation avec les initiatives du New Public Management (NPM) qu'avec les categories culturelles etudiees.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".