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 OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
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