Political Regimes and the Effects of Foreign Aid on Economic Growth
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 paper investigates whether the effect of foreign aid on economic growth differs under different political regimes. On average aid is found to have a negative significant impact on growth in developing countries, although the effect seems to be quite fragile and varies substantially across regime type. In tinpot countries aid has very little impact on growth and the returns to aid as aid/GDP increases appear to be constant. But in totalitarian countries aid has a robust positive significant influence on growth, with a tendency for diminishing returns for an aid/GDP ratio in excess of 21.5%. The better effectiveness of aid under totalitarian system than under tinpot seems to persist even when the model specification or sample are changed. Aid has no significant impact on the improvement of human rights and human development indicators, but it does have some influence in reducing infant mortality. An implication is to combine aid programs with a long-term human rights constraint. (JEL F350, O230, O400) I am indebted to two anonymous referees and A.N.Wahid, the editor of the journal for many helpful and incisive comments and suggestions. Previous version of the paper was given at 2001 meeting of the Canadian Economics Association at McGill University, Montreal, Canada. I am grateful to the participants at the seminar.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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