MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115827728 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v4n4p135

Human Capital and Economic Growth in Pakistan: A Cointegration and Causality Analysis

2012· article· en· W2115827728 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nabila Asghar, Asma Awan, Hafeez ur Rehman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCointegrationHuman capitalEconomicsCausality (physics)EconometricsJohansen testOrder (exchange)Short runGranger causalityError correction modelMacroeconomicsMonetary economicsEconomic growthFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is an attempt to investigate the role of human capital in terms of education and health on economic growth of Pakistan during 1974-2009. Using annual data, ADF, PP and Ng-Perron tests are utilized to check the stochastic properties of the variables. Long-run relationship among variables is confirmed through Johansen and Juselius cointegration test whereas the long-run and short-run dynamics are observed by VECM specification. For causality purpose both VECM based causality and Toda-Yamamoto causality tests are employed. Stability of the model is confirmed through CUSUM and CUSUMSQ. The results indicate strong positive impact of human capital on economic growth despite the fact that Pakistan has been spending less percentage of GDP on education and health facilities to create human capital. The study concludes that in order to reap maximum benefits from human capital there is a need to formulate and implement effective economic policies related to the provision of education and health facilities to the people.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.240 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations55
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207