Impact of Foreign Aid on Foreign Direct Investment in South Asia and East Asia
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 analyzes the impact of foreign aid on foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows in selected countries in East Asia and South Asia – two regions that have received huge foreign aid as well as FDI inflows. Theoretically, foreign aid can either facilitate FDI by funding projects that raise the marginal productivity of capital, or crowd out FDI as the number of investment opportunities in developing countries is usually limited. Using the FGLS (Feasible Generalized Least Squares) panel estimation methodology with 1995–2012 panel data from 7 East Asian and 7 South Asian countries, this study finds that the impact of foreign aid on FDI is significantly positive and robust across several model specifications. The estimated results also suggest that FDI is significantly affected by corruption control, rate of return, infrastructure, human capital, market potential, and political stability, and East Asia enjoys a locational advantage in attracting FDI vis-à-vis South Asia. These results further our knowledge of the foreign aid-FDI dynamics in developing countries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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