Institutional Legitimacy in State–Market Partnership: Singapore and Botswana
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 The paper examines the impact of institutional legitimacy on Singapore's and Botswana's experience with state–market partnership in economic policy implementation – specifically, private sector development. The elements of institutional legitimacy seen as key factors influencing the success of economic policy implementation include: the moral and legal authority by which governments command the trust and acquiescence of the broader citizenry; the perception of the government's credibility and competence by organized interests in the market; and the government's ability to engage market interests in sustained collaborative networks. Institutional legitimacy, however, could be understood at two levels – the macro and meso levels. Notes 1. Interviewees in the Singapore public sector are not comfortable discussing such matters in depth. 2. Interview with an official of the Singapore National Trade Union, Singapore, October 2005. 3. Interview with a professor at the National University of Singapore, Singapore, December 2005. 4. Interview with an official at Singapore's Civil Service College, Singapore, December 2005. 5. In my interview with a senior researcher at the Botswana Institute for Development Policy Analysis (BIDPA), he notes that Batswana defer to political authority like “a nephew to his benevolent uncle”. 6. Interview with a middle-level researcher at the BIDPA. 7. Interview with a Botswana Federation of Trade Union (BFTU) official. Additional informationNotes on contributorsCharles Conteh Dr. Charles Conteh is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at Brock University, Ontario, where he teaches Comparative Public Policy and Administration. His research interest is in the area of Policy Implementation, Interorganizational Theory and Governance, with a focus on Economic Development Policy.
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 | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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