In litigation in the US, the parties are obligated to produce to one another, when requested, those documents that are potentially relevant to issues and facts of the litigation (called "discovery"). As the volume of electronic documents continues to grow, the expense of dealing with this obligation threatens to surpass the amounts at issue and the time to identify these relevant documents can delay a case for months or years.The same holds true for government investigations and third-parties served with subpoenas. As a result, litigants are looking for ways to reduce the time and expense of discovery. One approach is to supplant or reduce the traditional means of having people, usually attorneys, read each document, with automated procedures that use information retrieval and machine categorization to identify the relevant documents. This study compared an original categorization, obtained as part of a response to a Department of Justice Request and produced by having one or more of 225 attorneys review each document with automated categorization systems provided by two legal service providers. The goal was to determine whether the automated systems could categorize documents at least as well as human reviewers could, thereby saving time and expense. The results support the idea that machine categorization is no less accurate at identifying relevant/responsive documents than employing a team of reviewers. Based on these results, it would appear that using machine categorization can be a reasonable substitute for human review.
Museums, along with other public sector organisations, have been urged to co‐produce. Co‐production may offer increased resourcing and greater effectiveness, and enhances public value through stronger relationships between government and citizens. However, co‐production, particularly that which involves collaboration with communities, is largely resisted by public sector organisations such as museums. This research examines the extent to which museums co‐produce and the role played by professional bodies in driving or inhibiting co‐production. It finds that the study of co‐production in museums reveals the influence of ‘institutional inertia’ and the limits to which professional bodies are able to ‘diffuse’ co‐production and change established professional practice.
The arts and cultural sector has historically relied on funding from state and federal levels of government. Increasingly, however, local government has become a source of distinctive cultural policy making and a provider of significant funding for arts and cultural activities. The paper notes the relative absence of analyses of the role of local government in policy literature. It argues that with the recent proliferation of dedicated local cultural policies and plans, the attention of scholars is warranted. Through an analysis of the cultural plans of five local councils around Australia, the paper argues that the distinctive feature of cultural policy at the local level is a function of local government's proximity to its constituents, flexibility in decision-making and the discretionary nature of its expenditure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.