MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037836116 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v13n7p138

Impact of Health and Literacy on Economic Growth in Morocco

2020· article· en· W3037836116 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Seddik BENNACEUR, Boujemâa Achchab

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceLiteracy ratePer capitaHuman capitalWork (physics)LiteracyCommissionEconomicsBusinessEconomic growthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of our work is to verify the impact of the improvement of health conditions and literacy on economic growth in Morocco during the period between 1980 and 2018. We based ourselves on the work of (Mankiw et al., 1992), in which they studied the impact of human capital on economic growth by integrating it as a component in the Solow model. The data we have used mainly comes from the High Commission for Planning and the World Bank. The observation that we have made is that the composite health and literacy index that we have developed has no significant impact on the growth of GDP per capita in Morocco during the period studied, which means that the literate and healthy work force does not have the expected effect on economic growth in Morocco. Thus, to be able to take advantage of its qualified and educated workforce, we suggest that the Moroccan authorities should encourage investments in sectors of activity that require this kind of workforce, because the study of the current market situation of employment in Morocco has shown that the agricultural sector and the informal sector have a significant share in the national GDP, but recruit an illiterate or low-skilled workforce.

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)0.003
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.598
Teacher spread0.390 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207