Capital Account Liberalization and Growth in the WAMZ: An Empirical Analysis
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
The paper employed recent time series econometrics to analyze and determine relationships between capital account liberalization and economic growth in the West African Monetary Zone2 (WAMZ) for the period 1980–2012. For the purpose of clearly ascertaining the impact of the variables of interest on economic growth, a country by country estimation was carried out. The short-run and long-run relationships between capital account openness and economic growth were investigated by applying the autoregressive distributive lag (ARDL) bounds testing approach suggested by Pesaran et al. (2001). The empirical results of the ARDL models showed a significant positive relationship between capital account liberalization and growth in Ghana and Sierra Leone. This suggests that the removal of restrictions on capital accounts in Ghana and Sierra Leone would promote economic growth in these countries in the long-run. Liberalization had positive and significant impact on growth in Ghana even in the short-run. However, there was no significant long-run relationship between liberalization and growth in The Gambia, Guinea, Liberia and Nigeria, implying that opening of the capital account should be gradual and complemented with sound macroeconomic and financial policy. Overall, the diagnostic tests indicated that our ARDL models were stable.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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