Financial Development, Savings and Economic Growth: Evidence from Bahrain Using VAR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research paper investigates the linkage between the financial development and the economic growth in Bahrain during the period 1981 to 2013. The motivation for kicking off on the Bahrain economy is attributed on account of paradigm shift manifested in moving from hydrocarbons purveyor to being in the financial services and industrial hub. Given the limiting factor embedded with the bivariate causality structure, the paper encompasses savings as an intermittent variable. The paper makes an earnest investigation to gauge the long run and short run relationship among financial development, savings and the economic growth. Time series data are taken for a time span of 33 years (1981- 2013). Data are culled from the World Bank Database. Financial Development measured by M2(broad money)/ GDP is represented by F, Economic growth measured by GDP per capita is represented by Y and Savings measured by Domestic Savings/GDP is represented by S. No long term co-integration is found among the variables under consideration as represented by Johansen test. Through the employment of multiple econometrics tools under Vector Auto Regression (VAR) framework, it is unearthed that the empirical evidence supports neither the supply –leading hypothesis nor the demand –following hypothesis for the Bahrain. While savings and economic growth have bi-directional causality at 10% level of significance. In responding to inexplicit results between the purported variables, the current study recommends that more wide ranges of reforms in the financial services are entailed, so as to escalate further the economic growth in the Bahrain economy.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".