European FDI in Ireland and Iceland: Before and after the Financial Crisis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyses Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) investment in Ireland and Iceland from other European countries during two periods, i.e., the pre-financial crisis period of 2000–2007 and the financial crisis period of 2008–2010. The aim of this research is to determine what made the countries interesting to foreign investors in both good and bad times; and, secondly, to examine whether European Union membership (and the Euro) made a difference in this respect. The results were obtained by using data from the OECD, the World bank, and other sources. The model constructed for the study applies the inverse hyperbolic sine transformation of the gravity model, which is a novel approach. The results demonstrate that before the financial crisis of 2008, European Union (EU) membership did not help Ireland attract more FDI from other EU countries. However, once it had been hit by the crisis, Ireland attracted more FDI from other EU countries. Iceland, on the other hand, which is not an EU country, attracted FDI from non-EU countries rather than from EU countries before the financial crisis. After the crisis, however, the origin within Europe, of FDI in Iceland had no significant effect on the flow of FDI into the country.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".