MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121465497

Government Accounting Reform in an Ex-French African Colony: The Political Economy of Neocolonialism

2016· article· en· W3121465497 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Lassou, Trevor Hopper

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeocolonialismIndigenousAccountabilityCorporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsPolitical scienceAccountingEconomicsPolitical economyFinanceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the political economy of introducing a computerised accounting system in a former French colony in Africa with little government accounting and few financial statistics. The reforms were a condition of structural adjustment programs imposed by the World Bank to improve governance, decision making and government accountability in a country with a turbulent political history since independence, and weak and often corrupt governance. The reform was unusual in that indigenous civil servants had considerable discretion over the choice and development of the system. Thus the local capability in developing government accounting technology suited to the local context and derived from learning by experience was created. The system was widely regarded as effective but it was abandoned for a French system which ultimately proved problematic. The decision to change the system and its ensuing problems are attributed to North-South relations, indigenous neopatrimonial leadership, and neocolonialism, especially by France in Francophone Africa.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207