E-Governement, Democratic Governance and Integrative Prospects for Developing Countries
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this chapter are threefold: first, to first provide a conceptual framework for understanding e-government as a set of four, interrelated dimensions of public sector change; secondly, to consider the relevance and applicability of this framework for both developed and developing nations; and thirdly, to explore the interface between domestic and transnational governance reforms in an increasingly digital era. The world in the twenty-first century needs a globally federated governance architecture, the design of which must include social, economic, political and technological considerations. This strengthened focus on transnational governance systems must also be joined by the recognition of the dysfunctional nature of the present system of bilateral international assistance programs among countries. With improved governance conditions of transparency and trust transnationally – facilitated in part by a much more politically creative and aggressive use of new technologies, the resources allocated by each country across their various recipients would serve both developing nations and the world as a whole if they were pooled and coordinated through new transnational mechanisms. Request access from your librarian to read this chapter's full text.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it