‘Free market’, export-led development strategy and its impact on rural livelihoods, poverty and inequality: The Philippine experience seen from a Southeast Asian perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ‘free market’, export-led development strategy has not delivered its promise of development in agriculture, as far as the Philippines is concerned. The World Bank-and IMF-instigated privatization and deregulation policies with direct consequence to rural livelihoods carried out much earlier and far wider in the Philippines than in some other Southeast Asian countries have coincided, overlapped and interlinked with the GATT/WTO trade/exchange rules. These two broad sets of policy related to agricultural production and exchange, combined, have largely reinforced, not undermined or eroded, pre-existing agrarian structures dominated by domestic and transnational elites. The overall outcome is the opposite of neoliberal reformers' predictions: the transformation of the Philippines from a net agricultural exporting to a net agricultural importing country. This development strategy has failed to address the persistence of poverty and growing inequality in this country. If a poverty-eradicating strategic national development is to be achieved in the Philippines and in some of the latter's regional neighbors, a radical recasting of the pre-existing agrarian structures partly through explicitly pro-poor land policies will be necessary and urgent.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".