An Economic History of South Africa: Conquest, Discrimination and Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book represents the first major foray by the late Charles Feinstein—the renowned UK economic historian—into academic analysis of his country of birth. It is also the first comprehensive economic history of South Africa to incorporate not only the two decades after 1948 during which the policies and institutions of apartheid were articulated and imposed, but also the subsequent two decades during which these structures were weakened and undermined. Writing 10 years after the formal demise of apartheid, Feinstein has been able to set the economic characteristics of those turbulent final years in the context of the longer-term record of South Africa's growth and development. Feinstein begins, however, by considering that record in its comparative international perspective, and finds that the ‘most striking feature of this comparison over eight decades is the remarkable long-run deterioration in South Africa's relative performance, from one of the best economies … to one of the worst’ (p. 5). Drawing on a sample of thirty ‘comparable market economies’, he charts South Africa's growth performance in three periods—1913–50, 1950–73 and 1973–94—against the average growth in GDP per capita for several developed and developing regions or groupings (including the other former British Dominions of Canada, Australia and New Zealand).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".