A Historical Review of Local Intermediaries in Impoverished Contexts
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
The role of local intermediaries in impoverished contexts has been a focus of attention within the marketing and development literature since shortly after WWII. A systematic review of this work reveals that while much of this literature identifies market intermediaries as exploitative and unspecialized entities, other work views them more positively. These conflicting accounts, rarely supported empirically, have resulted in diverging policy recommendations. Many scholars call for the wholesale removal of such intermediaries, while a lesser number argue that they can and should be supported. The dominant view as regards local intermediaries reflects three prevailing biases in the marketing and development literature: an emphasis on transformation; a rejection of the local; and a favouring of consumers and producers over intermediaries. This paper describes these biases and proposes shaping constructs, potential future research questions, theoretical lenses, and methods of analysis that should ideally guide future scholarship on the role of local intermediaries within impoverished contexts.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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