Stock Markets Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: Business Regulations, Governance and Fiscal Policy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the effectiveness of the state in stimulating stock market activity in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) using fiscal policy, governance quality and stock market as the main determinant variables. Using annual data from six selected sub-Saharan African economies and employing a dynamic panel data estimating technique, we find that government effectiveness stimulates capitalization while business regulations decrease it in SSA. In addition, we find that final consumption expenditure, interest rate spread and credit to the state increase capitalization whereas credit to the private sector and inflation had adverse effects. With respect to business regulations, our study reveals that starting a business, closing it and enforcing contracts engender stock market activity in SSA. Among the several variables that stimulate stock market activity; only foreign direct investment (FDI) did increase capitalization. Thus, the study concludes that since not all government institutions and business regulations are critical to stock market development, various governments should be careful and selective in their economic stimulants if they want to develop their stock markets.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it