Impacts of Foreign Direct Investment on Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from Australian Economy
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 examines foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows and its impact on economic growth in Australia. FDI inflows are considered to be a vital source of economic growth or development for any economy and it plays big role in growth in gross domestic product (GDP), improvement in infrastructure, employment creation, export and trade performance. This paper examines the relationship between FDI and economic growth of Australia through regression analysis between FDI and different measures of economic growth. The multiple regressions is used to derive conclusion on importance of FDI. The results highlight that FDI inflows contribute to the Australian economy including a growth in GDP, export performance and employment. Mining and quarrying has been identified as an attractive sector in which it has contributed to 7% of GDP, a large amount of capital has been invested and employed intensive labor. The result reflects absence of relationship between FDI and economic growth of Australia as two out three variables shows poor relationship with FDI. The findings provide critical information to Australian policy decision makers to make an informed decision with regard to attractive investment sectors and policies in encouraging foreign investors to invest in the country.
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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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