Costa Rica: resilience of a classic social democracy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“Costa Rica is not a country. It is a pilot project. It is an experiment.” Thus declared José (“Pepe”) Figueres in 1982 in the midst of the country's worst economic crisis since the depression of the 1930s (quoted in Cardozo Rodas 1990, 24). Figueres – former Junta Chief, President of the Republic, and founder of the social-democratic PLN (Partido de Liberación Nacional) – was revered by many for his role as the main architect of the Costa Rican welfare state and reviled by others for repressing left-wing labor unions in the aftermath of the 1948 civil war, as well as for later episodes of corruption and friendships with shady characters (such as fugitive financier Robert Vesco). While the claim that “Costa Rica is not a country” would strike most of its citizens as dubious (or as one of don Pepe's characteristic, forgivable exaggerations), the idea that it is – or at least was – a “pilot project” or an exceptional experiment is widely shared, at home and abroad. Costa Rica's progress in human development and the solidity of its democratic institutions are noteworthy given that other Central American countries have markedly lower levels of well-being and long histories of civil strife and authoritarian rule. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) now includes Costa Rica (which ranked forty-seventh worldwide) among those countries with “high human development” (UNDP 2005, 219); in 2001, UNDP recognized that, “Costa Rica and [South] Korea have both made impressive human development gains, reflected in HDIs [Human Development Indexes] of more than 0.800 [on a scale of 0 to 1.0], but Costa Rica has achieved this human outcome with only half the income of Korea” (UNDP 2001, 13).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".