Repenser l’évaluation du risque-pays dans le contexte de la mondialisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionnellement, le risque-pays est défini par rapport aux conditions sociopolitiques et économiques internes du pays hôte. Au regard de la nouvelle donne internationale, cette vision est remise en cause et il apparaît nécessaire aujourd’hui de réexaminer ce concept. Ainsi, à partir de l’analyse des grands changements dans l’environnement international et d’une enquête internationale Delphi, cet article apporte un éclaircissement sur les principales composantes du risque-pays dans le contexte actuel de la mondialisation. Il suggère que les sources de risque dans un marché étranger se trouvent dans un ensemble interdépendant de facteurs locaux politiques, socioculturels, économiques et financiers ainsi que de variables d’influence extérieures favorisant la contagion entre les pays. Pour mieux rendre compte des risques courus par les entreprises internationales dans les marchés hôtes, il propose le concept du risque-pays global qui prend en compte aussi bien les influences régionales et mondiales que les variables nationales dans l’analyse du risque-pays.
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 | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".