Curse or blessing: economic growth and natural resources (Comparison of the Development of Botswana, Canada, Nigeria and Norway in the Early 21st Century)
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
This paper aims to review the concept of resource curse, to summarize key points from existing literature and apply them on four selected countries at the beginning of the new millennium. The practical part investigates several hypotheses established by comparing research papers on impact of natural resources on the example of two developing countries (Nigeria and Botswana) and two developed countries (Canada and Norway). Specifically, the validity of the Prebisch-Singer hypothesis, Dutch disease symptoms and several hypotheses about a negative impact on political institutions have been verified. The results confirm the Prebisch-Singer hypothesis for selected commodities in the long term and some of the symptoms of Dutch disease in period 2000–2016 in the selected countries. Hypotheses about the impact on the political institutions have not been confirmed. The prices of commodities were identified as a key transmission channel of resource curse in the short run.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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