MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2197953345 · doi:10.52399/001c.26992

Isomorphism: An Explanation for the Popularity of Public-Private Partnerships?

2009· article· en· W2197953345 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting Finance & Governance Review/Accounting finance & governance review · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic-Private Partnership Projects
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularityIsomorphism (crystallography)Modernization theoryGovernment (linguistics)Public administrationValue (mathematics)Political scienceBusinessPublic economicsEconomicsEconomic growthLawMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) are a popular public policy tool, there is evidence to suggest that they often fail to deliver value for money, a key objective. Focusing on the use of PPPs in education in Ireland, this paper draws on perspectives from institutional and isomorphic theories to illuminate the use of PPPs as a modernisation tool of government. It finds that, while the adoption of PPPs has been characterised by difficulties, policy makers persist with their use. This is attributed to coercive isomorphic pressures in the case of Northern Ireland and mimetic isomorphic pressures in the Republic of Ireland.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.012
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it