The proliferation of neoliberal ideology: A study of international anti-corruption discourse through the lens of institutional entrepreneurship theory
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
This study examines the development and influence of the international anti-corruption regime, utilizing Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to dissect the discursive practices that shape perceptions of corruption and the strategies employed to combat it. Our analysis reveals how Western institutional entrepreneurs play a pivotal role in defining corruption predominantly as bribery and governance failures, underpinned by a neoliberal ideology that prescribes societal norms and identifies corrupt practices. By exploring the mechanisms through which this ideology is propagated, the research enriches institutional entrepreneurship theory and highlights the neoliberal foundations of current anti-corruption efforts. This study not only enhances our understanding of the institutional frameworks that govern anti-corruption discourse but also demonstrates how discourse legitimizes certain ideologies while marginalizing others. The findings offer practical tools for altering power dynamics, promoting equitable participation, and addressing the imbalanced North-South power relations. By challenging established perspectives, this research contributes to transformative discourse and action, offering new pathways for understanding and combating corruption. These insights have significant theoretical and practical implications for improving the effectiveness of corruption prevention and counteraction strategies globally.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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