Transparency Reforms in the Public Sector: Beyond the New Economics of Organization
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
This article challenges the arguments of the new economics of organization (NEO) on the phenomenon of transparency in the public sector. This is achieved by conducting an empirical study of 16 federal agencies in Mexico, which analyzes the implementation of the federal transparency law. Our findings indicate that some organizations are developing internal dynamics well beyond those anticipated by the law, while others are just complying with the minimum legal requirements. We suggest that there is a dynamic of transparency ‘internalization’ in these organizations that the NEO has been neglecting, and also a basic contradiction in the construction of the NEO theory, which affects the design and implementation of transparency laws. Solving this problem would demand a change of the underlying paradigm that sustains transparency reforms. Instead of taking opportunism, selfishness, and a profound distrust attitude toward public servants as departure points, effective transparency reforms require trustworthy public officials in order to endorse and implement successful organizational transformations that foster public openness and transparency.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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