MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318928655 · doi:10.2307/2672487

The Evolution of Shareholding Enterprise Reform in Rural China: A Manager Empowerment Thesis

2001· article· en· W2318928655 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ray Yep

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Affairs · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChina's Socioeconomic Reforms and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaEmpowermentBusinessEconomic systemEconomic growthGeographyEconomicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

hareholding reform is one of the preferred prescriptions for revitalizing S the efficiency of public enterprises in reform China. The idea has been received favourably by Chinese economists and Party leaders2 and gradual reform measures encompassing this idea have been introduced since the early 1990s.3 The concern of this paper is with its application in the countryside. By 1995, 12 percent of all enterprises owned by townships or villages in rural China had adopted various forms of shareholding reform4 and, at the end of the twentieth century, such organizational innovation had became the central feature of the further development of rural enterprises. The purpose of this paper is not to provide a summary of these reforms during the last ten years. Instead, it focuses primarily on the application of the shareholding principle to the restructuring of collectively owned enterprise at the township level. By analyzing the development of a case in Shandong province, it attempts to explain the evolution of rural shareholding reform in terms of the changing balance of power over economic management at grassroots level. It highlights the importance of

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacific AffairsSame topicChina's Socioeconomic Reforms and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207