MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800987953 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v13-n5-773-789

Assessment system and empirical study on China’s local governance quality

2018· article· en· W2800987953 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jie Tang, Dong Wang, Weiteng Lin, Chang Su

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEducational Reforms and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaCorporate governanceQuality (philosophy)BusinessEmpirical researchLocal governanceEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceEconomicsStatisticsMathematicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Good governance is an important guarantee for the sustainable development of regional economy. Since the Reform and Opening-up, China's local economic development has made remarkable achievements, which has aroused the concern of the academic community. The main contents of China's local governance quality assessment include: government capacity, marketization, and rule of law, which means a new multidimensional perspective on local governance assessment: "power allocation + governance capacity + rule of law". This paper designs the index system of China's local governance assessment based on literature investigation and coefficient of variation, which utilizes two approaches: qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis. Furthermore, the investigation analyzes the panel data (2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014) of provincial regions in China by utilizing global factor analysis and weighted average. The results indicate that the improvements in government capacity, marketization, and rule of law were higher in the majority of provinces studied in central and western China between 2001 and 2014, while they were lower in most of provinces researched in northeastern China in the same period, which resulted from policy differences. In 2014, government capacity, marketization, and rule of law were higher in the majority of provinces investigated in eastern China, while they were lower in most of provinces surveyed in the rest of China, which was due to the differences in policies support, resources management, absolute geographical location, per capita GDP, and market economy. In order to improve local governance quality and achieve sustainable economic growth, it is very important to establish local governance structure as "effective government + efficient market", China should pay more attention to weak aspects of local governance and some provincial regions in western, central and northeastern China.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicEducational Reforms and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207