MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380324658 · doi:10.1007/s43545-023-00686-8

Government-NGO relationship: regulatory constraints and uncertain policy implementation in Vietnam

2023· article· en· W4380324658 on OpenAlexafffund
Hung Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueSN Social Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsDecreeGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsPublic administrationPolitical scienceRanking (information retrieval)Public relationsQualitative researchProcess (computing)BusinessSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines regulatory constraints and uncertain policy implementation on NGO (non-governmental organization) operations in Vietnam, and draws lessons for NGOs, the government, and donors. Research questions were answered through qualitative methods. Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted, thirteen with the representatives of NGOs, and seven with high-ranking government officers. In addition, documents (decisions, proposals, reports) were reviewed. The government of Vietnam continually impose regulations intended to govern NGO operations through Decree 12/2012/ND-CP, Decision 76/2010/QD-TTg., and Decree 93/2009/ND-CP. Policy implementation is uncertain and unpredictable, making government-NGO relations unhealthy. NGOs should educate the government and donors, increase the effectiveness of implementation, and acquire knowledge about government operations. The government needs to strengthen awareness about NGOs’ operations, and improve the regulatory process. Donor-NGO communications should be strengthened. In summary, the political imposition results in unhealthy government-NGO relations. Government-NGO-donor communication should be improved so that NGOs can benefit society.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSN Social SciencesSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207