The goals and theories of the new <scp>Ethiopian</scp> insolvency regime against global benchmarks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study offers a comprehensive examination of the goals and theoretical foundations of the new Ethiopian insolvency regime. The study identifies and examines the goals of insolvency in Ethiopia to ascertain which interests are protected and how. The study also identifies and analyses the theoretical foundations of the new Ethiopian insolvency law in determining the parties' interests to be protected. The study also evaluates the alignment of the goals and theories of Ethiopia's latest insolvency regime with the global best practice. The study underlines that, as a contemporary legislation, the new Ethiopian insolvency law follows an eclectic approach in determining its goals. The law aims to safeguard the interests of creditors and other stakeholders in the proceeding, thereby trying to strike a balance. However, the main goal of Ethiopian insolvency law is to protect creditors' interests. The study also found that the modern theories of insolvency worldwide have highly impacted Ethiopian insolvency law in determining and prioritising its goals and interests to be protected. The study underlines that Ethiopian insolvency law's theoretical foundations are also eclectic, with a substantial preference for safeguarding creditors' interests while protecting the interests of other insolvency stakeholders. The study also finds that Ethiopian insolvency law is modern, and its goals and theoretical foundations align with international best practices. Based on the discussions, the study also suggests the focal points and trajectory of future insolvency reforms in Ethiopia.
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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".