3 - Whither African Development? A Preparatory for an African Alternative Reformulation of the Concept of Development
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
Intended as a preparatory for an African alternative reformulation of the con- cept of development, this paper problematises Africa’s development experi- ence in order to understand the impasse that has characterised it. Three major concerns are addressed: first, development is historically examined as a politi- cally violent and oppressive, culturally deterministic and economically exploita- tive paradigm operating on a flawed logic. Second, it discusses the reconceptualisation of development as a global project in the current era of neo- liberal globalisation, and considers why problems of African development can- not be solved within the context of this equally flawed and problematic refor- mulation. Finally, the paper proposes ways in which development, rather than abandoned, might be reclaimed so as to allow for reformulations of indigenous African alternatives; that is, reformulated and anchored in indigenous concep- tions of social provisioning and the individual’s position within a community.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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