MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1488068905

Promoting Equality, Black Economic Empowerment, and the Future of Investment Rules

2010· article· en· W1488068905 on OpenAlexaff
David Schneiderman

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Issues in South Africa
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreatyNegotiationContext (archaeology)EmpowermentInvestment (military)Foreign direct investmentPolitical sciencePromotion (chess)International tradeEconomicsDevelopment economicsEconomic growthPolitical economyInternational economicsLawGeographyPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It generally is assumed that rules to protect and promote foreign investment are sufficiently flexible to address the specific needs of developing and less developed countries. What happens, however, when the typical model of investment treaty rubs against national constitutional commitments, such as those mandating the promotion of equality in post-apartheid South Africa? This paper explores such tensions in the context of free trade and investment negotiations between the United States and the South African Customs Union. South Africa’s plan to generate a new black middle class via a program of Black Economic Empowerment, it turns out, was a contributing factor to the scuttling of treaty negotiations. It is suggested that powerful OECD states such as the US are less likely to tolerate divergence from their model of investment protection even where divergence arguably is mandated by constitutional commitments to the promotion of equality elsewhere.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicLegal Issues in South AfricaFrench-language works237,207