MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1882624446 · doi:10.1111/roie.12191

Patterns of International Capital Flows and Productivity Growth: New Evidence

2015· article· en· W1882624446 on OpenAlexaff
Margaux MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of International Economics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsDiversification (marketing strategy)Monetary economicsPortfolioNet capital ruleForeign direct investmentPortfolio investmentCapital flowsContradictionCapital (architecture)ProductivityInvestment (military)Net foreign assetsMacroeconomicsInternational economicsCurrent accountFinancial economicsMarket economyExchange rateBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent evidence from developing and emerging economies shows a negative correlation between growth and net capital inflows, a contradiction to neoclassical growth theory. I provide updated and disaggregated evidence on the origins of this puzzle. An analysis of the components of capital flows and of gross portfolio positions shows that foreign direct investment is directed towards countries with the highest growth rates, but that portfolio investment outflows exceed these inflows. Liberalized capital accounts further exacerbate this pattern. My results suggest a desire for international portfolio diversification in liquid assets by fast‐growing countries lies at the heart of the puzzle.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations16
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of International EconomicsSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207