International Organizations and Ideas About Poverty in Sub‐Saharan Africa
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
This study explores how international organizations (IOs) shape ideas about poverty and anti‐poverty policymaking in sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA). It argues that, beyond the use of conditionality, IOs significantly influence conceptions of poverty in SSA through various mechanisms, including technical assistance, personnel training, and capacity building, collaborating with civil society organizations, publications, conferences, seminars, and as think tanks. The analysis focuses on the World Bank (WB) and the Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD), two organizations that have had a long‐standing relationship with SSA countries and have made significant contributions to development in the region. However, unlike the WB, whose activities in SSA are well known, the OECD's role in SSA is much less known. Therefore, this study broadens the discussion of the role of IOs in domestic policy development in SSA by incorporating the OECD. At the same time, the study offers a comparative perspective missing from empirical studies about IOs, which tend to focus on only one organization at a time.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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