MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2572354882 · doi:10.4102/apsdpr.v4i2.114

Alternative Service Delivery in Africa: The Case for International Regional Organisations

2016· article· en· W2572354882 on OpenAlexaff
Moses Ν. Kiggundu

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrica’s Public Service Delivery and Performance Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Issues in South Africa
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService delivery frameworkCorporate governanceState (computer science)Regional sciencePopulationPolitical scienceWork (physics)Service (business)HarmonizationRegional integrationEconomic growthPublic administrationGeographyBusinessSociologyInternational tradeEconomicsMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alternative service delivery (ASD) is generally confined to the provision opublic services within the boundaries of a single nation state. This paper extends thisconceptualization and practice beyond a single nation state by focusing on services provided by international regional organizations (IROs), which encompass more than a single country. Recognizing that the regional approach may not be suitable under all circumstances, the papertakes a contingency approach and discusses with illustrations the conditions under which the regional or continental approaches may provide superior public services to the wider population. Three examples from the East African Community (EAC), Africa’s riparian river basins, and cross-border illicit trade of conflict minerals in the Great Lakes region are given as illustrative cases. Noting that Africa’s growing aspirations for inclusive development and rapid transformation call for better governance and quality public services, the paper ends by calling for more scholarly work and field experiments on ASD and other models applicable at local, national, regional and continental levels.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrica’s Public Service Delivery and Performance ReviewSame topicLegal Issues in South AfricaFrench-language works237,207