Accounting for Vulnerability of African Countries in Performance Based Aid Allocation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The African Development Bank allocates its concessional resources through a procedure which is mainly based on the quality of the beneficiary countries' economic policy and governance. This allocation procedure relies mainly on the Performance-Based Allocation formula which can be criticized on two grounds. Firstly, the weight on economic policy and governance is viewed as being excessive. Secondly, it lacks transparency and consistency. We consider how to amend that formula so as to take into account certain common characteristics of many African countries. The main proposal is to augment the formula by an economic vulnerability criterion. The numerical simulations show that the introduction of the United Nations economic vulnerability index in the formula gives rise to allocations which not only account for post conflict situations but also inherent fragility. We also consider a lower population weight in order to address the problem of country size. This change helps avoid inconsistencies arising from the application of country allocation ceilings in the various stages of the computation. Finally, a few proposals concerning the African Development Fund's support to regional integration are explored.Ici disponible en tant que document de travail de la Banque africaine de développement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".