MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997548749 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2019.08.109

Revisiting the Causal link Between Agriculture, Industrial output and Financial Sector Development in South Africa

2019· article· en· W2997548749 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mabutho Sibanda, Zamanguni Gumede, Bomi Cyril Nomlala, Msizi Mkhize, Hlengiwe Ndlela

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureLink (geometry)Financial sectorEconomicsFinancial systemBusinessFinanceGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study seeks to establish the relationship between agriculture, industrial output and financial sector development in South Africa.It uses the Autoregressive Distributed Lag, Error Correction models and Granger causality techniques to test for long-and short-run relationships.The evidence from the models indicates the presence of a longrun relationship between industrial output and agriculture, which suggests that these sectors depend on each other for raw materials and inputs.In addition, stock market development represented by market capitalization has a long-run relationship with agriculture.However, no long-run relationship is established between credit extension and agriculture; and between gross fixed capital formation and agriculture, suggesting that an increase in agricultural output does not impact investment in long-term fixed assets.The evidence also shows a long-run relationship between exports and agricultural output, which is consistent with the export-led growth hypothesis.These findings have implications for policy formulation and allocation of resources.

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)0.005
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.153 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207