An Effective Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank: A Bottom Up Approach
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 This article suggests that the debate surrounding the inception of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank ( AIIB ) is missing a crucial element of staffing policy. We review existing literature on IMF and World Bank reform, which shows that developing and emerging economy leadership in the organizations may not be sufficient in changing the normative character and policy orientation of the new organization. To counter principle‐agent problems that make multilateral lending institutions unresponsive to policy directives from shareholders and management, we argue that staffing policies should be at the forefront of AIIB scrutiny. We show that, staffing practices should safeguard against three specific staff‐level issues: (1) half‐hearted or incomplete policy mandate reform; (2) intellectual monocropping; and (3) at organization culture incompatibility. To substantiate our conclusions and policy recommendations we examine the World Bank and IMF as case studies of staff‐level reforms in multilateral lending institutions.
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) | 0.000 | 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