MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918282317 · doi:10.1080/08911916.2018.1497469

Resource Funds: Another Side of the Austerity Die

2018· article· en· W2918282317 on OpenAlexaff
Salewa Olawoye

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Political Economy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicNatural Resources and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAusteritySovereign wealth fundHoarding (animal behavior)Global assets under managementInvestment (military)EconomicsResource (disambiguation)CommodityFinancePoint (geometry)BusinessEconomic policyForeign direct investmentInstitutional investorMacroeconomicsCorporate governancePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes the trend of resource funds adoption among extraction economies. Using commodity-based sovereign wealth funds as a reference point, the article analyzes Norway’s success story in using its funds to foster development and its influence in Sub-Saharan Africa. The prevalent investment strategy of savings in financial assets abroad could be ideal, especially with respect to the intergenerational wealth transfer. However, this is not advisable for a country that still lacks basic needs. The austerity-like measures introduced to build these funds entail a reduction in current spending and/or an increase in natural resource taxes. The aim is to show that this system of hoarding, rather than reinvestments, poses several risks that a developing country cannot afford.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Political EconomySame topicNatural Resources and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207