MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054877540 · doi:10.1142/s0217590813500124

WHAT HINDERS CROSS-BORDER PORTFOLIO INVESTMENT IN EAST ASIA?

2013· article· en· W2054877540 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dae Keun Park, Inseok Shin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Singapore Economic Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute
KeywordsExplanatory powerPortfolioForeign portfolio investmentPortfolio investmentOrder (exchange)EconomicsForeign direct investmentInvestment (military)Pecking orderMonetary economicsBusinessInternational economicsFinancial economicsFinanceMicroeconomicsMacroeconomicsOpen-ended investment companyReturn on investmentPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine statistical importance of a number of institutional factors, which have been alleged by market investors and policy commentators as significant barriers on cross-border portfolio investment in East Asian economies, but never been put to empirical tests yet. Taking advantage of the novel data set constructed by the ABMI-GoE, we empirically investigate the explanatory power of such institutional factors as market access-hindering regulations, foreign exchange controls, credit controls, taxation and inefficient post-trading infrastructure. We find that these alleged barriers indeed have significantly negative impacts on cross-border portfolio investment in East Asian economies. In addition, we find some support for the "pecking order" hypothesis in barriers on cross-border portfolio investment in the sense that barriers on post-trading efficiency and cost barriers are not effective unless barriers on market access are significantly lowered.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0050.008

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.279 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Singapore Economic ReviewSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207