Crisis misread: the interplay of governance and financial literacy in Lebanon’s 2019 downfall
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to investigate the underlying factors that limited Lebanese citizens, despite their financial literacy, from effectively anticipating and responding to the 2019 economic crisis. By examining latent variables, the research explores the interplay between financial literacy and quality of governance in crisis management. Design/methodology/approach The research adopts a quantitative approach using an online survey targeting 258 Lebanese respondents with educational backgrounds in finance, business or economics. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to identify latent factors influencing individuals’ ability to anticipate and mitigate the crisis’s impact. Findings The study reveals two primary latent factors that significantly influenced consumer behavior: (1) economic and financial literacy and (2) quality of governance. While participants demonstrated reasonable financial literacy levels and recognized early warning signs, their ability to respond effectively was hindered by low-quality governance. Corruption, fiscal mismanagement and a lack of transparent economic data limited consumers' capacity to act on their financial literacy. Research limitations/implications The study’s findings are based on a sample of 258 respondents residing in Beirut, which may limit broader generalizability. Future research should expand the sample size and geographic coverage. Practical implications The research recommends enhancing governance frameworks through judicial independence, digital government platforms and public education campaigns on corruption to improve crisis resilience. Social implications Strengthening public trust in institutions through improved governance can foster greater civic engagement and encourage proactive financial behavior, enhancing societal resilience against economic crises. Originality/value This study contributes to the crisis management literature by demonstrating that financial literacy alone is insufficient for effective crisis mitigation. The findings highlight the critical role of governance in translating financial awareness into meaningful precautionary actions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".