MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1504600825 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v7n6p232

Internal Deficit–External Deficit Nexus in Africa: 1960-2012

2015· article· en· W1504600825 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gérard Tchouassi, Ngangué Ngwen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCausality (physics)Nexus (standard)Deficit spendingDemocratic deficitCausationEconomicsGranger causalityCausal analysisMonetary economicsInternational economicsDevelopment economicsMacroeconomicsDemocracyEconometricsPolitical sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we have tested the causality correlation linking the internal deficit with the external deficit for a group of 15 African economies. Specifically, using causality analysis, we have tested the four possible causation linkages: (1) internal deficit causes external deficit, (2) there is bidirectional causality linking the two variables, (3) the two deficits are not causally related and (4) external deficits cause internal deficits. Using linear panel causality, this paper shows with heterogeneous Granger causality analysis that in five African countries, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Morocco, Democratic Republic of Congo and Tunisia, external deficit Granger caused internal deficit. Two countries, Nigeria and Egypt, postulate causality from internal deficit to external deficit. While one country, South Africa, reveal a bidirectional causal link between internal deficit and external deficit. Monetary policies focused on the efficiency, as well as the exchange rate, will help to re-build, harmonize and control the budget policy in African countries.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance→Same topicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth→French-language works237,207→