MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196007649 · doi:10.1093/ereh/heab019

Fiscal capacity in ‘‘responsible government’’ colonies: the Cape Colony in comparative perspective, c. 1865–1910

2021· article· en· W3196007649 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abel Gwaindepi

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Review of Economic History · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSouth African History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiteit StellenboschVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)EconomicsCapeGovernment (linguistics)MacroeconomicsPublic economicsGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study contributes to debates on the efficacy of institutions in settler colonies by comparing the Cape Colony’s fiscal path to the experiences of Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. I find that the Cape’s fiscal trajectory was divergent. Agricultural and mining taxes were important surrogates of income taxes in other colonies, but the Cape’s narrow interests pushed for insulation from direct taxes. This made the Cape’s fiscal path unsustainable with comparatively low per capita taxes, high deficits, and the highest level of indebtedness. I argue that the instrumentality of ‘‘responsible government” status was conditional on how imported self-government institutions were endogenized.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Review of Economic HistorySame topicSouth African History and CultureFrench-language works237,207