Guangdong's Challenges: Organizational Streamlining, Economic Restructuring and Anticorruption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I n his report delivered at the Fifteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) on 12 September 1997, Jiang Zemin severely criticized the over-expansion of the administrative bureaucracy in China. Jiang stated: Unwieldy organization, over-staffing, failure to separate the functions of the government from those of enterprises and serious bureaucratism directly hamper the deepening of reforms and economic development and impair the relationship between the Party and the masses.' The Chinese leadership therefore asks that the functions of the government be altered and separated from those of enterprises, allowing the latter be given genuine powers regarding production, operation and management. Jiang put forward the principles of simplification, uniformity and efficiency, and demanded that departments in charge of comprehensive economic management should shift their functions to macroeconomic control, while specialized economic departments should be reorganized or reduced.2 This organizational streamlining started at the central government level and would then be extended to the local level. Local government reform would follow the design of the State Council. It was scheduled that the central government would complete its restructuring by the end of 1998, and provincial government reform would begin in 1999. It was reported that leaders of the industrial provinces in the Northeast requested to have the reforms postponed, but the governor of Guangdong, Lu Ruihua, claimed that Guangdong had enoughjobs to relocate government cadres. Lu believed
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".