MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123991960

The Long March in Hong Kong: Continuing Steps in the Transition from Colony to Democracy

2006· preprint· en· W3123991960 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas S. Axworthy, Herman B. Leonard

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2006
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHong Kong and Taiwan Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyChinaPoliticsSovereigntyBeijingPolitical sciencePublic administrationGovernment (linguistics)Political economyPopular sovereigntySociologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hong Kong is in the midst of the most rapid political transition in China, and the success of this transition is crucial not only for the seven million residents of Hong Kong but also for the future of China itself. How the authorities in Beijing respond to democratic demands from Hong Kong, and how the government of Hong Kong treads a democratic pathway within the boundaries of the Basic Law, are two of the most important questions in international politics today. China’s decisions about Hong Kong will tell us much about the prospects of democratic transformation in China itself. Under British rule, Hong Kong developed what we term a strong “culture of liberty” – which by itself does not constitute or provide democracy, but which is a necessary foundation for any democratic institutions worthy of the name. What Britain did not attempt – at least until 1992, and, some would say, even thereafter – was any serious development of locally-based institutions of direct democracy. This meant that when Hong Kong was transferred to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, it had in place a novel, untested, and at best incomplete set of political institutions for democracy. In this paper, we describe the political system of Hong Kong and the series of reforms that have been undertaken since 1997, and suggest further steps that we believe would help to build a more effective democratic system. We outline a set of general principles about democratic governance, observing that any democratic system must provide mechanisms for authority (the ability to act), accountability (the requirement to provide information about accomplishments and to be held accountable for performance), and answerability (the requirement to provide information and answers to the public, media, and legislative authorities). We view Hong Kong’s institutions through this lens, providing comparisons to the British, Canadian, and American systems. Finally, we provide a series of suggestions about additional reforms that Hong Kong should consider, focusing mainly on devices to make party politics more robust, effective, and socially productive by giving parties a better-defined and more influential role in governance.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicHong Kong and Taiwan PoliticsFrench-language works237,207