MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337583724 · doi:10.1163/23525207-12340008

Promoting Successful and Sustainable Foreign Direct Investment through Political Risk Mitigation Strategies

2016· article· en· W2337583724 on OpenAlexaff
Lukas Vanhonnaeker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Chinese Journal of Global Governance · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical riskPolityPoliticsBusinessState (computer science)Investment (military)Foreign direct investmentSustainable developmentInternational tradeEconomicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Political risk is a critical component of international trade and it is often the source of concern for businesses willing to invest abroad in light of the limited ability of legal instruments to protect them against it. That is why further political risk minimization has traditionally been done through investor-oriented strategies that maximize the interests of the investor. These interests sometimes clash with the interests of the State: the State seeks to promote sustainable development interests while the private investor is pursuing its own interests. These are the situations where it is necessary to avoid conflict by aligning the interests of the foreign actor with the local polity, which can be done through mutually beneficial (i.e. both for states and for private trade actors) political risk mitigation strategies. In this regard, this paper demonstrates how such strategies can incentivize international trade actors to undertake commercial operations in a sustainable manner.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Chinese Journal of Global GovernanceSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207