The Politics of Regulatory Design in the Sovereign Debt Restructuring Regime
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
Abstract This article looks at two recent initiatives aimed at improving sovereign debt restructuring processes and asks why one initiative succeeded while the other failed. It argues that the success or failure of a reform initiative in the debt restructuring regime depends primarily on the legal-institutional design of the mechanism it is advancing. Hard law mechanisms face enormous political obstacles that make their realization unlikely. Several of these obstacles have been identified by previous studies, but this article highlights additional barriers. It also shows that, in contrast to hard law arrangements, private law contracts provide politically useful mechanisms for regulating debt restructuring, especially for powerful states with major influence over reform outcomes—namely, the United States. The article also argues that the historical legacy of earlier reform initiatives matters, but mainly through its ability to further enhance or diminish the political prospects of mechanisms whose utility has already been determined by their design features.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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