Motives and incentives in the privatization of the South Australian Lotteries
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPACTThis case study illustrates the importance of political factors in determining policy outcomes. In addition to technical and policy considerations, practitioners must consider the political aspects of policy changes and incorporate them into their assessments. Core political considerations were incorporated into the successful privatization of the South Australian Lotteries, which were derived from an earlier unsuccessful attempt. Public servants must develop sharp political skills in order to align with the strategies of political decision-makers.ABSTRACT This paper investigates the motives and incentives behind the privatization of the South Australian Lotteries. Our analysis yields three main insights: first, short-term financial considerations were the most important incentive in this instance of privatization. Second, a mix of instrumental and political considerations co-existed as motivating factors. Lastly, a previous (unsuccessful) privatization effort provided important guidance. These insights reveal the inadequacy of the established literature, which focuses on single-motive explanations of privatization, to account for special cases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it