MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W345070488

Kenya - export prospects and problems

2005· article· en· W345070488 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Francis Ng, Alexander J. Yeats

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaceDisadvantageQuarter (Canadian coin)Corporate governanceMarket accessBusinessInternational tradeProduction (economics)Supply and demandClothingInternational economicsForeign direct investmentDevelopment economicsEconomicsGeographyAgriculturePolitical scienceFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report examines reasons why Kenya and other African trade did not provide the engine of growth that it did elsewhere. During the last quarter century many Sub-Saharan African countries non-oil exports either declined in absolute terms, or expanded at a slower pace than world trade. Evidence suggests African countries, including Kenya, experienced serious supply constraints that limited their ability to capitalize on opportunities of international production sharing in foreign markets. Inappropriate governance policies, and a general unfavorable commercial environment, were largely responsible for Africa's supply problems. In addition, a decomposition of recent trade changes into supply and demand factors shows that, with two important exceptions (cut flowers and apparel exports) Kenya experienced a general erosion of its US and EU import market shares. These findings support the conclusion of the recent Africa Competitiveness Report that concludes Kenya is at a competitive disadvantage vis-a-vis more than one half the other African countries surveyed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→