Toward Fiscal Sustainability in Thai Local Government: Lessons Learned from Local Fiscal Management Practices in Canada, France, Japan, South Korea, and United States
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 paper compares and assesses the fiscal management strategies used by local authorities in Canada, France, Japan, South Korea, and the United States. This comparative survey seeks to identify the salient attribute of each country’s local fiscal policy and demonstrates how Thai local governing bodies can adopt those strategies to improve their overall fiscal health. This paper suggests that fiscal sustainability in Thai local government can be attained by embracing each system’s core principle. The Thai national government could follow the Canadian federal government example by devolving more administrative responsibilities to local government units, while maintaining several essential regulatory functions, such as rectifying regional disparities and imbalances in public service provision. Following the Japanese model, Thai local government ought to diversify their revenue sources to ensure adequate funding for public service delivery and community development. The Korean case demonstrates that a carefully designed property tax system can raise a substantial amount of revenue for local government and prevent speculative land ownership. The American system emphasizes citizen participation and fiscal transparency (i.e., traceability of how tax money is levied, collected, and spent). The French model resolves potential conflict of interest issues among local elected officials by charging the highly skilled professionals with policy analysis, financial auditing, and accounting."
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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