MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3083739702

Towards development-centred trade relations: a study of South Africa and the USA trade relations with particular focus on the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA)

2019· dissertation· en· W3083739702 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Nhlakanipho. Mkhwanazi

Notice bibliographique

RevueResearchSpace (University of KwaZulu-Natal) · 2019
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueInternational Development and Aid
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesAfrican Union CommissionAfrican UnionNew Partnership for Africa's DevelopmentMillennium Challenge CorporationAtlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyEuropean CommissionDanish e-Infrastructure CooperationAfrican Development Bank Group
Mots-clésFocus (optics)Political scienceInternational tradeEconomic growthEconomics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

With trade taking place continuously on a daily basis, its often-reported success gives the impression that all participants involved are to a certain extent somewhat successful too. This dissertation draws attention to the discrepancies that have often gone unnoticed throughout the decades and the effects that have arisen as a result. South Africa’s (SA) and the United States of America’s (US) trade relationship through the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) is the focus of this study, with this relationship being analysed from as far back as history has been recorded to the modern day. Least developed countries (LDCs) are an integral part of this study because most trade-related activities involve them, and they contain most of the world’s natural resources, but most importantly they also make up a large portion of the world’s population. It's baffling to see that where these factors are present, there's also inequality. Seemingly, there are efforts that deal specifically with the challenges faced by developing countries, but what is concerning is these solutions are formulated by developed countries which created them and continue to perpetuate them. The approach adopted was mostly that of contrasting events that have involved trade over the decades and a discussion of how these events have shaped international, political and trade relations, that is, the existing status quo. Examples include the two World Wars; oppressive regimes such as apartheid; and the formation of global institutions ranging from the International Trade Organization (ITO) to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and the World Trade Organization (WTO). The first three chapters contain an introduction, a background focus on development and the history of relations between South Africa and the United States of America. The last two chapters contain a discussion on AGOA as well as findings and recommendations that can be implemented to assist with this issue. What this dissertation was aiming to establish was the perpetual involvement of developed countries in the affairs of developing countries. This is illustrated through the renegotiation of the AGOA in 2015, where SA had to accept ultimatums set for it by the US. This dissertation further shows that such tactics are nothing new when the US is involved, as is evidenced by its involvement in major global events that have shaped the course of history. This approach is not only harmful but also stagnates development, as developing countries must adhere to agreements that sometimes are not to their benefit. The findings indicate a contradictory pattern: when solutions to challenges faced by developing countries are presented, they translate instead into a further stronghold over developing countries because of past atrocities such as colonisation and apartheid. What appears throughout the dissertation are the ever-present structures that are intended to perform functions supposed to be for the improved good of developing countries, but which result in those countries facing never-ending challenges, some of which are self-inflicted through alliances such as the AGOA with developed countries.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,079
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,158

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0090,004
Communication savante0,0050,004
Science ouverte0,0000,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,054
Tête enseignante GPT0,269
Écart entre enseignants0,215 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResearchSpace (University of KwaZulu-Natal)Même sujetInternational Development and AidTravaux en français237 207