MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605419497 · doi:10.1080/02255189.2017.1298519

Perceptions and practices of investment: China’s hydropower investments in Vietnam and Myanmar

2017· article· en· W2605419497 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHydropower, Displacement, Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersElectricity Generating Authority of ThailandWorld Bank GroupU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsChinaFraming (construction)HydropowerCorporate governanceNarrativeMainland ChinaPolitical sciencePerceptionDevelopment economicsSoutheast asiaEconomic growthGeographyBusinessEconomicsSociologyFinancePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

China is a major investor in hydropower in mainland Southeast Asia. These investments have triggered substantial public concern, with anti-Chinese attitudes intensifying across the region. Yet, Chinese involvement varies across the region. We examine the “practices and perceptions” of Chinese hydropower investment in Vietnam and Myanmar, attending to the framing of dominant explanations of these investments. We caution against reinforcing xenophobic narratives about China, and urge scholars to consider what these narratives obscure. Our concern is that exceptionalising the role of Chinese investors overlooks foundational issues regarding local participation and environmental governance.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.318 · 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