MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Towards an Interactive E-Government System in Sub-Saharan Africa

2016· book-chapter· en· W4255828635 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Conteh, Greg Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Government and Public Services
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Strengths and weaknessesInformation and Communications TechnologySalientService delivery frameworkE-GovernmentService (business)Political scienceBusinessKey (lock)Economic growthPublic relationsMarketingEconomicsComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Governments worldwide, including those in Africa, are embracing the promises and prospects of electronic service delivery (or e-government). In particular, countries in Sub-Saharan Africa are moving towards adopting system-wide Integrated Communication Technology (ICT) and Enterprise Content Management (ECM) systems to support Electronic Government (EG) services. There are reasons to believe that Africa stands at the threshold of a new experience in this century, but there are also considerable challenges ahead. This chapter examines some of the prospects and challenges of the continent's adoption of Electronic Government. The discussion focuses on the rationale and characteristics of e-government in Africa, as well as its strengths and weaknesses, with particular reference to two countries in the region – Ghana and Kenya. The chapter concludes with a synopsis of some of the key issues as well as salient lessons to highlight the broader future challenges and prospects of e-government in Africa.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational BusinessSame topicE-Government and Public ServicesFrench-language works237,207