Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book is an excellent reference on the state of port reform throughout the Asia-Pacific region. While there have been a number of articles in recent years on port reform in Australia, China, Hong Kong, Korea and Singapore, much of the Asia-Pacific region has been overlooked. This book not only rectifies this gap by providing much needed insight into the situation in India, Japan, Malaysia, and New Zealand, while also consolidating the work already completed elsewhere. With the rise of Asia as the world s most important shipping and port market, the editors are to be commended for bringing new voices to the discussion and developing a strong contribution to the port reform and port governance literature. Mary R. Brooks, Dalhousie University, Canada The transformation of public ports into commercially orientated and profitable entities is occurring apace in the Asia-Pacific region. This timely book is the first to take a regional perspective on port reform and port privatisation. A range of countries is examined, including China, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand. The book s contributors are academic specialists in the fields of port economics and management, whose country studies illustrate a variety of port privatisation methods and outcomes in an economically, politically and culturally diverse region connected by extensive maritime trade networks. Significantly, the book concludes that privatisation of ports is an important but far from universal approach to reforming the region s ports. Focusing exclusively on port privatisation in the Asia-Pacific region, this book will be of great interest to academics and policymakers who are interested in port reform, together with those interested in privatisation more generally in the Asia-Pacific region.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".