‘Free market’, export-led development strategy and its impact on rural livelihoods, poverty and inequality: The Philippine experience seen from a Southeast Asian perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it