Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book is about directly elected mayors – political leaders who head multi-functional municipal authorities and are voted into power directly by citizens in those municipalities. In many countries, such as the US, Canada and Japan, directly elected mayors are a typical or traditional feature of local political systems. In many others, they have been taken up as a reform to a system of local, urban or metropolitan government, and have been introduced more recently in many countries including Italy, Germany, Poland, Hungary and England (Hambleton and Sweeting, 2014). Supporters of the model of electing city leaders directly by popular vote tend to argue that it has both democratic process and functional efficiency advantages. Directly elected mayors are portrayed as being more visible, more accountable, more legitimate and more powerful than other sorts of city leader. As a result, it is asserted that directly elected mayors are therefore better equipped with greater capacity to govern than other sorts of political actor. Marsh (2012) noted that directly elected mayors have enduring and widespread appeal to policymakers, and this book taps in to that interest. For example, In the UK, directly elected mayors are not only seen as a way of improving urban governance (Sims, 2011), they are also a key part of the city-regional agenda (Harrison, 2015), and the government has passed the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016 to pave the way for ‘metro-mayors’, with responsibilities across city regions across England. In Australasia, a debate continues about the ways that directly elected mayors can play a stronger role in governance there (Sansom, 2012). A fairly typical policy-related rationale comes from the Plain English Guide to the Localism Act, from the UK Government (DCLG, 2011). As part of a programme designed to encourage the creation of directly elected mayors in cities in England outside London, the government argued: Many major cities in the world outside of the UK have a strong and powerful executive mayor. The Government believes that elected mayors can provide democratically accountable strong leadership which is able to instigate real change for the benefit of our largest cities. Mayors will be clearly identifiable as the leader of the city and will have a unique mandate to govern as they will be directly elected by all local electors. People will know who is responsible for a decision and where the buck stops.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.007 |
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".