MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248293367 · doi:10.24124/2017/1364

What are the prospects of China signing FTAs in Africa?

2017· dissertation· en· W4248293367 on OpenAlexaff
Thompson Oke Ayodele

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaInternational tradeDevelopment economicsDeveloping countryPolitical scienceGeographyEconomic growthBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

China's emergence as a global power is raising interest globally.This includes a rise in trade relations with Africa over the last two decades.China's relations with Africa have undergone several changes since the onset of modern China-Africa relations in 1955.In the current phase, relations have been marked by increasing economic interdependence.During the same period, China has signed Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with many countries in different continents and African countries have also embarked on their own FTAs.However, no FTAs have yet been signed between China and any country in Africa.This thesis examines the question: What are the Prospects of China Signing FTAs in Africa?This thesis documents the growth of China-Africa trade over the last two decades, analyses the reasons why China signs FTAs, and assesses whether three African countries, Nigeria, South Africa and Sudan meet the criteria for China's FTA partners.The thesis finds that there is a slim chance that China will sign FTAs with any of these three African countries in the near term, because African countries are at the fringe of China's foreign policy.African issues are rarely discussed at the highest decision-making authority in China, and China's FTAs with African countries may have impacts on the latter's manufacturing sectors.Over the medium-longer term, South Africa is probably the most likely candidate of the three countries for a FTA with China.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207