MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106651372 · doi:10.1080/02255189.2006.9669122

Lessons from the Struggle for a New International Technology Order

2006· article· fr· W2106651372 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Norman Girvan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntellectual propertyContext (archaeology)TRIPS architectureGlobalizationPolitical scienceTrade and developmentNegotiationRelevance (law)International tradeOrder (exchange)Developing countryEconomic growthEconomicsEngineeringLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper locates the work of Surendra Patel within the context of the efforts of the Global South to secure development-friendly reforms in the arrangements for international technology transfer. Negotiations for an International Code of Conduct on Technology Transfer during the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) were superseded by the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement in the WTO, but the relevance of Patel's analysis is shown by the current concerns of developing countries regarding the operation of TRIPS. The contribution of Patel's work to Caribbean research on technology is identified. The second part of the paper discusses another stream of development thinking to which Patel's generation gave rise, which focused on the internal dimension. It takes as an example the development of Caribbean economic thought in the early post-colonial period, and argues that there is continuing relevance to the “dependency critique” of writers in the 1970s in the context of the shortfalls of contemporary globalization. Patel's critical perspective on technology and development has provided a valuable legacy for succeeding generations.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0200.035
Scholarly communication0.0270.027
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0090.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.004

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développementSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207