MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162662080 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v4n9p13

Knowledge-based Economy (KBE) Frameworks and Empirical Investigation of KBE Input-output Indicators for ASEAN

2012· article· en· W2162662080 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Munshi Naser İbne Afzal, Roger Lawrey

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandardizationVariable (mathematics)Knowledge economyComputer scienceKnowledge managementMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to build a policy focused knowledge-based economy (KBE) framework based on the OECD KBE definition in order to identify the KBE factors in the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) region. The paper utilises the Beta coefficient technique which allows us to rank the most important KBE input factors to KBE output factors. After identifying KBE input-output factors, following the Australian Bureau of Statistics KBE framework assumptions, standardized beta coefficients are used to assess how many standard deviations a dependent variable will change, per standard deviation increase in the predictor variable. Standardization of the coefficient is usually done to answer the question of which of the independent variables have greater effects on the dependent variable in a multiple regression analysis, when the variables are measured in different units. Data are mostly collected from secondary sources such as the World Bank’s World Development Indicators and the International Institute for Management Development’s World Competitive Yearbook. The results show Singapore is the best performer in knowledge acquisition, production and distribution and the Philippines is the best performer in knowledge utilization. Indonesia, on the other hand, shows weak performance in almost all the KBE dimensions. The lessons from the success of Singapore and the Philippines for weak performance countries in KBE are to improve the efficiency of FDI inflows, to optimise the use of research and development expenditure, to increase the secondary school enrolment ratio and finally to increase the interaction between academia and industry, which facilitates the creation and commercial use of knowledge. This paper provides empirical evidence to rank the important KBE input factors that gives governments some insight on where to focus investment in order to become a successful KBE.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations26
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207