MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200178143 · doi:10.1080/01900692.2021.2001012

The Failure to Learn Lessons from Policy Failures in Developing Countries? The Case of Electricity Privatization in Ghana

2021· article· en· W4200178143 on OpenAlex
Frank L. K. Ohemeng, Joshual J. Zaato

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Public Administration · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic-Private Partnership Projects
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeveloping countryBusinessElectricityEconomic growthEconomic policyPublic economicsEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Do policy makers learn from their failures? The rational and normal expectation would be that they do, but experience shows otherwise. Notwithstanding the valuable and multiply expected learning opportunities presented by such failures, especially in Africa, policy errors continue unabated in both the developed and developing worlds. Even the high-profile nature of the failures across the continent seems insufficient to convince African policy makers of their significance. Focusing on the recent electricity privatization fiasco in Ghana, this paper examines factors that impede or otherwise affect policy makers’ ability to learn from their mistakes. Using interviewing a number of officials involved in the process of electricity privatization, we identified five main factors that continue to affect policy learning from policy failures in Ghana.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.292 · 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