MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900296209 · doi:10.1177/0020852318790335

Reforming a state in formation: from Structural Adjustment Programs to Results-Based Management – lessons from two decades of administrative reform in Cameroon

2018· article· en· W2900296209 on OpenAlexaff
Raoul Tamekou

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Administrative Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic administrationState (computer science)Political scienceOrder (exchange)Process (computing)Public managementOrganizational structureAction (physics)EconomicsComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article sets out to examine, from a socio-historical standpoint, the administrative change process specific to Cameroon. By analyzing the mechanisms and processes driving the administrative reforms put in place since the end of the 1980s, the study pinpoints the regularities characteristic of the national trajectory of administrative reform in Cameroon. The article is divided into three sections. The first presents the analytical approach chosen. The second part presents the various repertoires of the reforms put in place, as well as an overview of the main programs. The third, finally, sets outs the lessons drawn from the study. Points for practitioners The article explores the dynamic relationship between the production of administrative reforms and the impact of reforms on the politico-administrative order in Cameroon. It is thus demonstrated that while reform has become considered over the years as a specialized know-how and an objective framework for the construction of public action, it continues to be plagued by rationales that are foreign to the organizational purpose, and comes across as the “art of doing.”

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.334
GPT teacher head0.597
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of Administrative SciencesSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207