MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912996341 · doi:10.5539/ass.v15n2p37

Economic Growth and Demographic Dividend Nexus in Nigeria: A Vector Autoregressive (VAR) Approach

2019· article· en· W2912996341 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ademola Obafemi Young

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredenceDemographic dividendNexus (standard)DividendEconomicsPopulationContext (archaeology)ProductivityDividend policyMacroeconomicsEconometricsGeographyStatisticsSociologyDemographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In demography and population economics discourse, the macroeconomic implications of an upsurge in working age population, notably the labour force, on economic growth has been widely studied and the inherent beneficial impact has become known as demographic dividend. However, the exact mechanism linking the dividend to growth remains a perennial question. This motivates the current study to investigate empirically the dividend-growth nexus in the context of Nigerian economy in a multivariate VAR model spanning between the period 1970 and 2017. Specifically, the paper attempted to answer the question: Is the Nigerian Demographic Dividend an Education-triggered Dividend? Innovation Accounting Techniques was applied to assess the dynamic interactions among the variables. The empirical evidence obtained revealed that the innovation in gross enrollment made much contribution to the variation in economic growth relative to innovation in economic support ratio. The magnitude ranges between 20.09 and 27.54 percent. This result, thus, lend credence to the theoretical view of the education-triggered dividend model which ascribes to education twofold roles of helping to lessen fertility and also enhancing productivity but invalidates the conventional dividend paradigm.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207