Do Human Rights Matter in Bilateral Aid Allocation? A Quantitative Analysis of 21 Donor Countries
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
Objective. This paper analyses the role of human rights in bilateral aid allocation decisions of 21 donor countries. Methods. Econometric analysis is applied to a panel of three-year averages from 1984 to 1995. Results. Respect for civil/political rights plays a statistically significant role for almost all aid donors on whether a country is deemed eligible for the receipt of aid. Personal integrity rights, on the other hand, are insignificant. Civil/political rights remain significant for a bare majority of aid donors with respect to the amount of aid allocated to a country. Personal integrity rights gain some significance at this stage, but for a few donor countries only. There is no systematic difference apparent between countries commonly regarded as committed to human rights (Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway) and the rest of donor countries.Conclusions. Donor countries still have a long way to go in rewarding respect for human rights in their foreign aid allocation.
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 | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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