MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415790286 · doi:10.1111/faam.70014

Rethinking Accountability in Government Procurement in Africa Within the Neoliberal Governing Reforms: Some Evidence From Ghana

2025· article· en· W4415790286 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFinancial Accountability and Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic Procurement and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAccountabilityPoliticsProcurementEliteNeoliberalism (international relations)IdeologyGovernment (linguistics)Public sector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The paper draws on the “politics of the belly” framework to locate procurement of government contracts within a kind of governing in which often conflicting dynamics are closely intertwined and shape accountability practices differently. By taking a historical view, we show how neoliberal reforms evolved new organizational forms, embedded in the traditional way of doing business in Africa, and “succeeded” in promoting political elite interests in Ghana. Contrary to the neoliberal reforms ideology of promoting accountability, the paper shows how the socialization of individuals through informal political networks and the “politics of the belly culture” incubates corrupt practices and inevitably constrains accountability in public procurement. The paper contributes to scholarship on public sector reform, corruption, and accountability by showing how neoliberal accountability regimes, when introduced into political systems structured by informal power, are reconstituted to serve rather than challenge elite interests. It also offers practical implications for reform agendas that seek to engage with African states on more contextually appropriate terms. The paper argues that accountability in public procurement in Africa reflects the complex interplay of local political practices and informal networks, consistent with the logic of the politics of the belly. The question for policy actors is no longer just “how do we strengthen procurement systems?”—but “whose accountability do these systems serve, and how might reforms be co‐designed to account for, and counteract, embedded political interests?”

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.219 · 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