MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910805719 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12010012

Exchange Rate Volatility and Disaggregated Manufacturing Exports: Evidence from an Emerging Country

2019· article· en· W2910805719 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Duc Hong Vo, Anh The Vo, Zhaoyong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNingbo University
KeywordsExchange rateDevaluationVolatility (finance)Export performanceCurrencyInternational economicsEconomicsMonetary economicsManufacturing sectorEmerging marketsEffective exchange rateBusinessFinancial crisisMacroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The link between export performance and exchange rate policy has been attracting attention from policymakers, academics, and practitioners for some time, particularly for emerging countries. It has been recently claimed that implementing a policy that devalues the currency in Vietnam is an important factor for enhancing its export performance. However, it is also argued that such a policy could result in the harmful consequence of exchange rate volatility. This study analyzes the link between exchange rate devaluation, volatility, and export performance. The analysis focuses on the manufacturing sector and 10 of its subsectors that were engaged in the export of goods between Vietnam and 26 key export partners during the 2000–2015 period. Potential factors that could affect this relationship, such as the global financial crisis, Vietnam’s participation in the World Trade Organization, or even the export partners’ geographic structures, are also accounted for in the model. The findings confirm that a strategy that depreciates Vietnam’s currency appears to enhance manufacturing exports in the short run, whereas the resulting exchange rate volatility has clear negative effects in the long run. The impact of exchange rate volatility on manufacturing subsectors depends on two factors, namely, (i) the type of export and (ii) the export destination. Policy implications emerging from these conclusions are presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations62
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207