Broken Windows: Why Culture Matters in Corruption Reform
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
Corruption, or misuse of public office for private gain, is continually in the headlines. From hunger strikes in India to scandals around defence procurement in Canada, attention to corruption is growing. Corruption has been linked to weak economic growth and development outcomes (Kulshreshtha, 2008, p. 558). Though the problems of corruption have led aid agencies to recognize the fundamental importance of good governance, progress has been halting. In fact, there are almost no cases of a developing (‘post-colonial’) country moving from a highly corrupt situation to one in which corruption is minimized. Civil service reforms and elections of pro-reform candidates seem futile to bring long-lasting results in countries as diverse as India and Argentina. Failing states from Afghanistan to Iraq reveal corruption to be a central issue. While the role of culture, often defined as shared beliefs, attitudes, values, norms and practices is recognized in the academic literature as an element of potential importance, to date it has not been incorporated into the design of aid programmes to reform civil services. In this collection, we examine why attempts to reform the civil services of developing countries have largely failed in good part because they focus on the formal and ignore the need to reform culture as well. Our case studies including Singapore, Hong Kong, Chile, Afghanistan, Swaziland, India and Nigeria span a wide range of failures as well as a few success stories and are based on strong author knowledge of the local context as well as field research.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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