The Problems of Investment Climate in Uzbekistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper aims to give some insights into the investment environment and the analyses of factors influencing. The study is motivated by the high failure rate of foreign investments in Uzbekistan The findings of the study will benefit both local investors who are interested in learning about contemporary methods of investment valuation and foreign investors who are interested in assessing investment opportunities in Uzbekistan. The complexities of evolution of investment opportunities in emerging markets have been studied before. The problems associated with transparency, foreign exchange volatility and liquidity, contagion, governance, political risks (Note 1), and corruption have differing impacts on pricing and valuation across countries and regions. Uzbekistan is a newly-independent Central Asian country, where the same approaches of valuation methods are employed as in Russia, the Ukraine, and other European parts of the former Soviet Union. The provided analysis of investment climate in Uzbekistan suggests that the currency convertibility, lack of transparency and predictability, overregulated financial sector, limiting ownership and restrictions in “strategic” sectors are the greatest obstacles for many potential foreign investors. Also, inadequacies in investment policy and underdevelopment of stock exchange resulted 60% of all foreign investments went to energy sector. Overall business climate in Uzbekistan can be described as stable, but with a potential for rapid growth in the event of more radical reforms towards market.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".