Financial development in Jordan: Where do remittances play a role in bank credit?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Jordanian economy has been a recipient of huge amounts of remittances. Indeed, for more than a decade now, the inflow of this capital has been fluctuating around 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Within this context, the subject matter of remittances has resulted in the development of a myriad of research issues. One of these issues is the impact of remittances on financial development or bank credit to the private sector. This paper looks at the relationship between financial development and remittances in the Jordanian context. Based on the time period 1992-2019, and time series econometric techniques (co-integration and vector auto-regression, among others), this paper examines the impact of remittances on bank credit to the private sector, and on its main sectoral distributions. The estimated results reveal some interesting findings. There is no long-run stable relationship between bank credit to the private sector and remittances. However, there is a stable long-run relationship between credit to individuals (households) and remittances, and between credit to the construction sector and remittances. These conclusions imply that remittances, on average, promote private consumption in general, and residential spending.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".