MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155749496 · doi:10.1111/corg.12377

Corporate governance in the Middle East and North Africa: A systematic review of current trends and opportunities for future research

2021· review· en· W3155749496 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCorporate Governance An International Review · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceTransparency (behavior)Middle EastShareholderPoliticsPolitical scienceBest practicePublic relationsAccountingState (computer science)Systematic reviewBusinessLawFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Research Question/Issue We systematically review the corporate governance (CG) literature on the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), organize it into six main themes and their subthemes, and propose several opportunities for future research. Research Findings/Insights We highlight CG's unique characteristics in the MENA region as well as differences and similarities across MENA countries. We shed light on how organizations are governed in this region especially that their ownership structures are centered on families and the state, and that Islam plays a major role in their governance. Our review establishes a solid foundation for future research directed at CG practices in the MENA region and encourages policymakers and practitioners to improve CG in the region. Theoretical/Academic Implications To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic literature review covering CG in the MENA region. In an effort to encourage the continuing evolution of this research stream and augment its contributions to the broader CG literature, we develop an extensive research agenda focusing on several key topics that deserve further attention such as ownership and countries' political regimes, family business and royal families, Sharia law, and executive compensation, among others. Practitioner/Policy Implications This review invites policymakers and investors to consider implementing better policies aimed at improving CG practices, specifically by fomenting transparency, developing financial markets, providing stronger protections for minority shareholders, and enhancing compliance with existing and new regulations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.424
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.066 · 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