Bibliographic record
Abstract
The successes, in the 1990s, of some established currency areas, such as the Euro and the CFA zones, re-awakened interest in their optimality as the inability of individual economies to compete in and maximally benefit from an increasingly globalized world was greatly acknowledged. This fact was not lost on the ECOWAS member countries that agreed to set up a currency union by 2020. However, the depth of the European sovereign debt crisis and its protracted duration are enough to raise concern in Abuja and other West African capitals as their self-imposed deadline for monetary integration looms. This paper tests the optimality of ECOWAS as a currency area by using two methodologies: a reduced VAR to examine the response of the economies to external price shocks from France, the UK and the US, and a co-integration analysis of the theory of Generalized Purchasing Power Parity (GPPP) to determine the existence of a co-integrating relationship between the exchange rates of four of the currencies that are currently in existence. The results of the study are mixed. The VAR model shows that external shocks from the three foreign countries do not affect all the members similarly. The effects of some of the shocks are statistically insignificant on more than half of the countries. However, the result of the cointegration analysis supports optimality as it identified at least one co-integrating equation and, in some cases, two.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".