MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016566669 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v4n2p196

Lending Policies and Credit Administration in Pre-colonial Nigeria: A Case Study of Kundila of Kano

2012· article· en· W2016566669 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lawal Bello Dogarawa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollateralAdministration (probate law)ColonialismLoanGovernment (linguistics)FinanceBusinessFinancial institutionIslamEconomicsFinancial systemLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Paper studies the canons of lending and credit administration methods in the pre-colonial informal financial sector taking a case study of Kundila a famous 19th Century trader in Kano City. Using desk research and interview techniques, the study finds similarities in both the lending principles and credit management styles in the pre-colonial informal setting and the modern financial institution’s practices. However, Islamic legal system in the 19th Century has helped to quicken administration of justice on cases of loan default as against secular laws that tend to cause delay in modern Nigeria. There was also intensive monitoring of loan and cases of auction of collateral or other severe measures against loan defaulters. The paper concludes that modern financial sector can learn from the leasing methods of Kundila so as to accord small and medium scale enterprises the opportunity of acquiring sophisticated machineries and equipment. This will increase aggregate production and assist government in achieving food security as well as rapid economic growth and development in the economy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207