MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995842041 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2014.03.24

Foreign Direct Investment, Institutions and Economic Growth: Evidence from the MENA Region

2014· article· en· W1995842041 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mariem Brahim, Houssem Rachdi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign direct investmentEconomicsBusinessInternational economicsDevelopment economicsInternational tradeEconomic policyMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Few scientific papers treat the role of institutions on the relationship between foreign direct investment (hereafter FDI) and economic growth. In the existing literature, the FDI effects on growth are not easy to understand. Mixed findings, both theoretical and empirical, have been provided on this issue by the academic research. The first contribution of this study is an analysis of how institutions quality affects FDI-growth nexus. The second contribution is the use of the Panel Smooth Transition Regression (PSTR) modeling because the nexus between FDI and economic growth is nonlinear and depends on specific national factors especially institutions quality. This method helps to account for a change of regime in the effects of FDI on economic growth. The major finding of this study is that the effect of FDI on economic growth is conditional to the development of institutions in MENA countries. Empirically, on a sample of 19 MENA countries over the period 1984-2011, we found that only countries with good institutions can exploit the advantages of FDI on growth.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations54
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207