MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Achieving the Millennium Development Goals in Sub‐Saharan Africa: A Macroeconomic Monitoring Framework

2006· article· en· W3123614766 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre‐Richard Agénor, Nihal Bayraktar, Emmanuel Pinto Moreira, Karim El Aynaoui

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Economy · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillennium Development GoalsLife expectancyPovertyEconomicsInvestment (military)Aid effectivenessDevelopment economicsEconomic growthPublic investmentMalnutritionMacroDeveloping countryMacroeconomicsPopulationPolitical scienceMedicineFiscal policyPoliticsEnvironmental healthComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a macroeconomic approach to monitoring progress toward achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in Sub‐Saharan Africa. At the heart of our framework is a macro model which captures key linkages between foreign aid, public investment (disaggregated into education, infrastructure and health), the supply side and poverty. The model is then linked through cross‐country regressions to indicators of malnutrition, infant mortality, life expectancy and access to safe water. A composite MDG Indicator is also calculated. The functioning of our framework is illustrated by simulating the impact of an increase in foreign aid to Niger at the MDG horizon of 2015, under alternative assumptions about the degree of efficiency of public investment. Our approach can serve as the building block for Strategy Papers for Human Development (SPAHD), a more encompassing concept than the current ‘Poverty Reduction’ Strategy Papers.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations38
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld EconomySame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207