MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555086554

The OECD and Global Public Management Reform 1

2009· article· sl· W2555086554 on OpenAlexaffabout
Leslie A. Pal

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Zagreb University Computing Centre (SRCE) · 2009
Typearticle
Languagesl
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic administrationPublic sectorCorporate governancePolitical scienceNew public managementPoliticsEconomicsManagementLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last two decades have seen substantial public sector reforms efforts around the world. A leading global actor in these reform efforts has been the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The OECD launched its governance efforts in 1990, and published its path-breaking review of public sector reform in 1995 (Governance in Transition). The paper examines the OECD's role as a key actor in a global public policy network devoted to public sector reform, and how it has contributed to changes in state structures and administration. It reviews the OECD's key publications, examines how the organization developed its public sector reform agenda, and assesses its relationships with and influence over national governments. The methodology consists of a review of documents and publications, as well as interviews. The key findings are that the OECD is a key node in what is emerging as a global network around public sector reform. 1
A paper presented at the 21 World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Santiago, Chile, July 12-16 2009. Research for the paper was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. I would like to thank research assistants and collaborators who have been involved in the larger project over the past two years: Tamara Krawchenko, Yasmeen Ahmad, Bogdan Buduru, Derek Ireland, and Marian Gure. Tamara Krawchenko in particular produced excellent research materials, some of which has been incorporated into this paper with her permission. I would also like to acknowledge the help and advice of Ms. Jocelyne Bourgon, former head of the Canadian delegation to the OECD. Please do not cite or quote this paper without permission.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Zagreb University Computing Centre (SRCE)Same topicPublic Policy and Administration ResearchFrench-language works237,207