Challenging the necessity of New Public Governance: Co‐production by third sector organizations under different models of public management
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
Abstract In this article, I answer two research questions: How do different models of public management define relationships between the state and the third sector? And how do these relationships influence how third sector professionals involve citizens in co‐production? I consider evidence from non‐profits in France, England and Quebec to illustrate how three varying models of public management (neo‐Weberian state in France, New Public Management in England, and New Public Governance in Quebec) structure the relationships between government and the third sector (based, respectively, on hierarchy and control, contracting and performance management, and partnership) and how these in turn impact non‐profits' co‐production activities with citizens. The article challenges the thesis that co‐production is most compatible with the model of NPG, demonstrating the variety of co‐production activities that occur in all three contexts and providing new insights into the contextual contingency of the barriers and enablers to co‐production between third sector professionals and citizens.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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