Assessing the Viability of the East African Community as a Monetary Union
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to evaluate the feasibility of the East African Community (EAC) in establishing a successful monetary union. Despite its strong interest and progress, the East African Community (EAC) faces substantial challenges in pursuing a single-currency monetary union. A careful examination of trade data and evaluation of the convergence criteria supports a cautious move toward forming a monetary union rather than its formation for political expediency. The compliance of EAC countries in achieving the target levels of the convergence criteria is, at best, mixed. Mainly, achieving low inflation rates, maintaining lower budget deficit-to-GDP and debt-to-GDP ratios, and building robust foreign reserves were weak. Despite the divergence among member countries in attaining a low and stable inflation rate, overall strong co-movement in inflation rates and the ability to maintain an average inflation rate near the target of eight percent is encouraging. External factors, such as rising financing costs, de-globalization efforts, and geopolitical tensions, complicate the establishment of a monetary union and create uncertainty about its potential benefits. In addition to these new developments, weak trade complementarity, inadequate cross-border infrastructure, expansive non-tariff barriers, and different degrees of compliance with convergence make a speedy move towards monetary union risky. Addressing these observed potential problems before monetary union via harmonization of investment and economic policies, creating robust institutions that foster trust and regional cooperation will mitigate economic and political rivalry and aid in forming an effective monetary union.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".