MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283699815 · doi:10.15353/rea.v14i1.3582

Foreign Direct Investment and the Robustness of Host-Country Commitment

2022· article· en· W4283699815 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shaikh Shahnawaz

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economic Analysis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign direct investmentEliteRobustness (evolution)Government (linguistics)BusinessCarry (investment)EconomicsMarket economyMonetary economicsInternational economicsFinanceMacroeconomicsPoliticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a model of a forward-looking government wooing foreign direct investment by enacting policies that reflect its commitment to the foreign enterprise. The ease with which the government is able to spend or carry out economic reform to complement the foreign venture evolves over time and influences the likelihood of its sustained commitment. The domestic and external strength of the government, the stability and not necessarily the level of returns from the project, venture-specificity of government spending or reform, and public and elite attitudes toward foreign commercial entry determine how invested the government remains in the long term success of the enterprise. More committed governments tend to be stronger and prefer robust investor-regime relationships. Reform that is not designed too narrowly to favor the investor is also less likely to be reversed later. Like pro-FDI public sentiment, a noisy policy environment induces deeper government commitment.

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)0.012
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economic AnalysisSame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207