MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328260701 · doi:10.5509/20067919

Killing Five Birds with One Stone: Inward Foreign Direct Investment in Post-Crisis Korea

2006· article· en· W2328260701 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Affairs · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Industrial and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign direct investmentInward investmentEconomicsInternational economicsBusinessMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

the first 35 years of the Republic of Korea's2 economic development, the government showed a clear preference for foreign capital in the form of loans rather than inward foreign direct investment (IFDI) as a means of financing its development plans. This reluctance to allow a greater degree of foreign participation in the domestic economy stemmed from a desire to control the allocation of financial resources and also reflected public concerns that increased levels of IFDI might lead to foreign domination of the Korean economy. The 1997 crisis led to a fundamental change in Korean attitudes towards inward investment, as a desperate need for capital, advanced technology and know-how prompted a comprehensive reform of FDI policy and promotional systems. However, while many Koreans recognized the contribution made by inward investment to the country's economic recovery and its potential role in promoting sustainable growth, anti-foreign capital sentiment lingered in some areas of society. The past two decades have seen a remarkable increase in global flows of capital and credit, most notably in the form of foreign direct investment. Although FDI in developed countries has accounted for the lion's share of these transactions, flows to developing countries have also accelerated in recent years. The rising level of inward investment in developing countries reflects, to a significant extent, changes in their perceptions of and attitudes towards IFDI. Whereas, in the 1970s and early 1980s, many potential host countries expressed concerns that inward investment might create monopolies, exploit the local economy and restrict competition in the domestic market, this negative view had changed to a more upbeat assessment by the 1990s, as scholars and practitioners had identified a range of beneficial effects of inward FDI in terms of promoting economic development.3

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it