Financial Development and Inclusive Growth in Nigeria: A Multivariate Approach
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
Financial development is a multidimensional concept that constitutes a potentially important mechanism for long run growth in an economy. However, short-run gains at the expense of long-run growth coupled with various exogenous factors could have precipitated economic fluctuations in Nigeria. Therefore, efforts to moderate these fluctuations by successive federal authorities must have prompted them to adopt various economic policy measures including Stabilization Policy, 1981- 1983, Structural Adjustment Programe (SAP), 1986-1992; Medium Term Economic Strategy, 1993-1998 and the Economic Reforms 1999-2007, on the basis that such policy actions can engender economic growth in the long run. This was eventually the driving force behind various financial policy reforms in Nigeria. However, in spite of all these reforms, the associated problems that exist still include: inefficiency in the allocation of funds to the productive sectors, lack of long-dated funding and decline in domestic credit to the private sector. All these frustrate inclusive growth experience in the country. Therefore, the important issues of concern are: what level of financial development is required for growth to be inclusive? How can the economy create and support inclusive growth through the financial sector? Hence, the objective of the paper is to examine the impact of financial development on inclusive growth in Nigeria using a multivariate model (Bound testing approach), this study obtained new evidence for the finance-growth nexus in Nigeria.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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