Balancing Values, Pressures and Demands: Strategies for Public Administration in Hong Kong and China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hong Kong, as a part of the People's Republic of China, has been experiencing new challenges since 1997. The reintegration of capitalist Hong Kong within the socialist framework of China was resolved with the innovative concept of “one country, two systems.” The application of the system has met with some problems, but the advent of globalization and its demands have imposed new and more formidable challenges. This article examines the challenges of globalization from the perspective of Hong Kong as a unit of China. The key argument is that Hong Kong has long been prepared for dealing with the routine problems of management, internationalization and development of human resources. However, operating as a unit of the Chinese political and administrative system entails a different set of challenges. These include a comprehensive understanding China's place in the world system, dealing with internal issues, and developing a system and public service that can strike a balance between the local and international demands. A series of reforms have been initiated, but their impact is not clear yet and further changes are required to integrate Hong Kong as an effective component of the system for improving governance in China. The main challenges lie in striking a balance between the values of traditional public administration and new public management, between local and national interests, between external and internal pressures for change, and between demands from the society for service the and capacity of the government to respond.
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 | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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".