Attaining economic growth through financial development and foreign direct investment
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
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to consider the heterogeneous relationship among financial development, foreign direct investment (FDI) and economic growth, examining the possible directions of causality among them in both the short and long runs. Design/methodology/approach A sample of the G-20 countries over the period 1970–2016 is utilized. A vector error-correction model is used to consider the possible directions of causality among financial development, FDI and economic growth. Findings Results suggest a cointegrating relationship among the three series. Although short-run links among the variables are mostly non-uniform, both financial development and FDI matter in the determination of long-run economic growth. Practical implications Attention must be paid to policies that promote financial development. This, in turn, calls for fostering incentives to guarantee continued support to liberalize the economy and promoting capital openness. Additionally, financial infrastructure should be improved to improve financial innovation. The establishment of a well-developed financial market, including well-functioning banks and other financial institutions, can facilitate further investment and an easier means of raising capital to support the activities of FDI. Economic growth can ultimately be elevated through both financial development and FDI. Originality/value The study considers a sample of the G-20 countries, which have received relatively little attention in the existing literature. In addition, the study concurrently analyses the trivariate causal relationship among financial development, FDI and economic growth, a topic on which there has been a dearth of research.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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