Stewardship Accounting Practice by Government Ministries in Cameroon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examined the practice of stewardship accounting by Government Ministries in Cameroon. It investigated how inclusive budget planning, timely budget execution, stringent budget control, and resolute scrutiny of government financial statements, affect the government stewardship accounting practice. To archive this, primary data collected from members of parliament were analysed, and regressed using the Ordinary Least Squares technique. The empirical results therefrom were of positive and statistical significance. They revealed that stringent budget control, and resolute scrutiny of government financial reports, significantly improve the practice of stewardship accounting in the Government Ministries. It was recommended that the government of Cameroon should frankly facilitate the participation of parliamentarians, civil society organisations, advocacy groups, and the citizens, in the budget preparation and execution processes. Such sincere participation invokes debates on problematic trade-offs and opportunity costs which are crucial in improving the wellbeing of Cameroonians. It was further recommended that parliamentarians should effectively play their role as representatives of the Cameroonian people, not withstanding their political inclinations. Consequently, they will not falter in their responsibility to resolutely scrutinise and authorise the budgets, and hold the Government and its Ministries fully accountable. The last recommendation was that Article 66 of the Cameroon Constitution (lying dormant since 2006) be put into practice. Article 66 provides for the declaration of assets by senior government officials, and others elected or appointed, at the beginning and at the end of their office tenures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".