Mythes et realités de l’investissement privé en Afrique noire française: Le cas du Cameroun dans les années 1940 et 1950
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the end of the Second World War the establishment of an economic plan seemed to be of necessity for France to mend her national and imperial economy which the war had weakened. In 1946 the French National Assembly established a long term program for the development and modernization of France’s overseas territories entitled Fonds d’Investissement pour le Développement Economique et Social des Territoires d’Outre-mer (FIDES). Although public funds were to be used to carry out this program, a wide participation of private capital was expected. Consequently, the French government made the exportation of French private capital easier not only to meet with the demands generated by the FIDES program but also to dynamize French capitalism. One of the direct consequences of the FIDES program beginning in 1947 was the stimulation it afforded to investment by private European concerns in Cameroon. But how important was this private investment actually? This article shows, through the example of French Cameroon, how private investment in French black Africa was both a myth and a reality in the 1940s and 1950s. It assesses private investment, examines the attempts made to encourage private investment, and analyzes the causes of private disinvestment in Cameroon.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".