MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1911786469 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v6n5p90

The Impact of the Growth Rate of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on Poverty Reduction in Nigeria

2015· article· en· W1911786469 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olanrewaju Makinde Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGross domestic productEconomicsPovertyUnemploymentOrdinary least squaresUnemployment ratePoverty reductionReal gross domestic productDemographic economicsPoverty rateProduct (mathematics)Labour economicsEconometricsDevelopment economicsMacroeconomicsEconomic growthMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is on the impact of GDP growth rate on poverty reduction in Nigeria. The study made use of secondary data sourced from the Central Bank of Nigeria statistical bulletin and the National Bureau of Statistics between 1986 and 2012. The model for the study has as its dependent variable the Unemployment rate whose reduction should imply poverty reduction and its explanatory variable is the GDP growth rate. Using the Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression techniques; our study revealed that the there is a weak relationship between the unemployment rate and the Nigerian Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rate and that instead of an inverse relationship, it was positive. That is, as GDP was growing the unemployment rate was also growing. The study holds that when citizen cannot work to earn they will remain poor. This implies that the GDP growth has not impacted positively on the poor through job creation sufficient enough to reduce the percentage of the unemployed and the incidence of poverty over the period of study. We therefore recommend that there is the need to reassess the growth direction so as to give priority to key sectors like the agricultural and the industrial sectors that have the capacity to generate and absorb more labours thereby solving employment problem and at the same reducing the poverty incidence on the citizens.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207