MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942695173 · doi:10.7202/1058448ar

Assessment of the Political Risk in a Country: a Practitioner’s View

2019· article· en· W2942695173 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carlos Gustavo Arrieta Padilla

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue générale de droit · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRisk Management in Financial Firms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical riskPoliticsGovernment (linguistics)Agency (philosophy)Foreign direct investmentInvestment (military)InternationalizationPolitical instabilityBusinessEconomicsFinancePublic economicsPolitical scienceInternational tradeLawMacroeconomicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Political risk is inherent to foreign investment. It stems from either the government's or the political regime's instability, or restrictive and compelling governmental policies. To cope with this risk, two complementary instruments are used: risk assessment and deterrent measures. Taking into consideration South America, the author explains how the political risk assessment is realized through risks indexes, public or corporate: each carries its own criteria as shown here by the analysis of General Motors and Union Carbide methods of assessment. The author then discusses the means available to the investor to forecast and minimize the negative effects of the actualization of a political risk. He identifies two main categories of deterrent measures: business oriented strategies carried out by the investor or legal techniques of protection. Among the latter, the author analyses the stabilization and internationalization clauses; the security offered by certain bilateral or multilateral treaties to foreign investment; the guarantees agreed upon by organizations such as the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency; the transfer of domicile of legal entities.

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)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue générale de droitSame topicRisk Management in Financial FirmsFrench-language works237,207