MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162927014 · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2021.1907234

PUBLIC MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES IN THE DIGITAL RISK SOCIETY: A Critical Analysis of the Public Debate on Implementation of the Danish NemID

2021· article· en· W3162927014 on OpenAlexaff
Ojelanki Ngwenyama, Helle Zinner Henriksen, Daniel Hardt

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Information Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Relations and Crisis Communication
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk societyPublic relationsDanishRisk managementNew public managementSocial mediaSociologyPublic sectorPolitical sciencePublic administrationBusinessEconomicsSocial scienceManagementLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rise of the digital society is accompanied by incalculable social risks, but very little IS research has examined the implications of the new digital society. Drawing on concepts from Beck’s critical theory of the risk society and critical discourse analysis, this study examines the public discourse on risk events during the launch of NemID, a personal digital identifier for Danish citizens. This research illustrates our difficulties and challenges in managing some of the fundamental social risks from societal digitalisation. Limited institutional capabilities for digital technologies force public officials to depend on private companies motived by profit instead of the public interest. Beliefs in digital technology as the primary determinant of social and economic progress also present many public management dilemmas. When digital risk events occur and citizens’ fears are stoked by news media and public discourse, public officials seem to have no other strategy for managing the escalating fears than systematically distorted communication. The continued rise of the digital risk society demands that IS research respond to the challenge of generating knowledge for its public management.

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)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0310.059
Scholarly communication0.0290.019
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0110.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations33
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Information SystemsSame topicPublic Relations and Crisis CommunicationFrench-language works237,207