MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208104635 · doi:10.1111/dpr.12606

The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (<scp>EITI</scp>) and local institutions in Ghana’s mining communities: Challenges in understanding barriers to accountability

2021· article· en· W3208104635 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment Policy Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityYork UniversityBrock University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAccountabilityTransparency (behavior)RevenueBusinessCorporate governanceDisbursementPublic economicsAccountingEconomicsPolitical scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Motivation The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) is a global standard that promotes transparency and accountability in resource‐rich countries to improve governance of the extractive sector. Despite improvements in the subnational disclosure of royalty payments, a significant problem is the failure of these efforts to improve accountability and benefits to mining communities. Purpose The article asks how institutions of local governance affect national efforts to improve accountability to mining communities in Ghana on the use of mineral revenues for development. It contributes to the broader theoretical literature on EITI by clarifying what outcomes, if any, can be directly attributed to the disclosure of royalty payments. Methods and approach This qualitative study employs a case‐study analysis of EITI adoption in Ghana, one of the first countries to join the initiative. The article contextualizes local governance institutions and dynamics in relation to the royalty disbursement process. It draws on original field research to analyse their role in impeding the expected benefits of royalty disbursements to mining‐affected communities. Findings The research identifies deficiencies in local governance structures and processes as they relate to the use of mineral royalties, but also instances of variation in how officials react to EITI. The range of individual actors, institutions, and complex processes on which the subnational disbursement of royalties depends, makes it problematic to attribute the absence of improvements directly to Ghana's EITI. The findings demonstrate that EITI's role in participating countries is best understood as facilitative and indirect when addressing development outcomes for mining communities. Policy implications Disclosure of royalty payments to local governments is unlikely on its own to result in improved development outcomes for local communities, even when the national government is committed to the goal. There is a need for policy interventions aimed at specific communities to ensure royalty payments reach the intended beneficiaries. These interventions should be tailored to the differences in national governance dynamics in countries participating in EITI, paying attention to contestation over the distribution and expenditure of royalties that disclosure helps bring to light.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.122 · 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