Outward-Orientation and Economic Growth in Developing Countries: A Quarter-Century Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two widely-cited measures of outward orientation are constructed for the 1990s to estimate growth regressions of the kind reported by Dollar (1992) for 1976-1985 and Ram and Yang (1998) for 1985-1990. Indexes of outward orientation and regression estimates are compared for the three periods. Ten points emerge from the study. First, as measured by the index of exchangerate distortion, outward orientation in developing countries increased over the 25-year period 1976-2000. Second, the cross-country dispersion of this measure has tended to decline. Third, in terms of exchange-rate variability, outward orientation shows a slight decline, and its dispersion seems to have increased. Fourth, except for the Middle-East, regional patterns are broadly similar. Fifth, large changes are observed in outward-orientation ranks of many countries across the three periods. Sixth, however, ranks of many countries show a remarkable stability. Seventh, our full-sample estimates for 1991-2000 do not show a signifi cantly negative association of economic growth with either exchange-rate distortion or its variability, and present a marked contrast from those for 1976-1985 and 1986-1990. Eighth, our estimates indicate lack of association between outward-orientation and growth in any of the several subsamples considered by us. Ninth, when we generate a panel by pooling common observations (countries) for the three periods, the most appropriate econometric procedure shows that economic growth has no signifi cant negative association with either measure of outward-orientation in the entire set of pooled observations. Last, our research thus strengthens and extends the skepticism articulated by Rodriguez and Rodrik (2001) in regard to claims made about the empirical support provided by cross-country data for the growth-promoting role of outward-orientation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".