MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013867020 · doi:10.1521/siso.2013.77.3.315

The Nigerian "One Percent" and the Management of National Oil Wealth through Nigerian Content

2013· article· en· W2013867020 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience & Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicNatural Resources and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnrestEliteOil reservesResource curseDevelopment economicsEconomic growthSocial unrestResource (disambiguation)BusinessEconomicsNatural resourceEconomic policyPetroleumPolitical sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Five decades of oil production in Nigeria have failed to produce meaningful economic or social development. Instead, the country has become a laboratory for economists proposing policy solutions to the "resource curse." To increase the benefit accruing to the nation from its resource wealth, Nigeria has adopted "local content" policies, seeking to domicile in Nigeria oil-related economic activity previously located abroad. The stated aim of the Nigerian Content Act (2010) is to promote the utilization of Nigerian human and material resources and services. With passage of the NCA, Nigeria has reached a crucial juncture. "Nigerian content" policies have the potential to succeed where previous policies have failed to translate resource wealth into economic and social development. However, a close reading of the genesis of these policies in light of current unrest in Nigeria suggests that Nigerian content is also a project to direct increased benefit to the domestic elite from the country's petroleum wealth.

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.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.185 · 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