MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988458786 · doi:10.5430/jbar.v3n1p45

Administrative Simplification and Economic Growth: A Cross Country Empirical Study

2014· article· en· W1988458786 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kevin Poel, Wim Marneffe, Samantha Bielen, Bas van Aarle, Lode Vereeck

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business Administration Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanel dataEuropean commissionEuropean unionPublic economicsCommissionEconomicsBusinessEconomic policyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Administrative burdens stemming from regulations are a worldwide cause of concern for policy-makers. Reducing administrative burdens has become an important policy objective in economic growth strategies for many governments. The European Commission set out a policy goal of reducing administrative burdens by 25% by 2012, although the literature provides limited evidence of its impact. Therefore, this paper examines the impact of administrative burdens on growth by using 6 business regulation variables for a panel of 182 countries. The results from the fixed effect regression analysis suggest that reducing administrative burdens in certain policy areas spurs economic growth. In particular, reducing burdens concerning start-ups and paying taxes enhances growth significantly. Furthermore, using a panel of 26 European countries, our results suggest that reducing the administrative burdens by 25% has a positive effect on growth of 1.62 % in the European Union.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business Administration ResearchSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207