The determinants of foreign direct investment: what about the potential of the Arab Maghreb countries?
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 elucidate the main determinants of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the case of the Arab Maghreb countries. Design/methodology/approach We employ a dynamic panel analysis using the General Method of Moments for a sample composed of 105 countries over the period 1985–2018. Findings We show that FDI stability, market size, higher education enrolment, quality of institutions, distance, sharing of common border, and bilateral investment and integration agreements are the main determinants of FDI location. These determinants are neither general. The potential for attracting FDI from AMU countries is poorly exploited. FDI to the AMU is lower than estimated stock. The observed FDI to potential FDI ratio does not exceed 87%. France and Spain are the main investors in the AMU region thanks to historical and cultural links. The FDI from the United States, Canada, Germany, Belgium, and Japan are below what is expected. Originality/value The contribution of this paper is observed on the examining oh the determinants of the FDI in the Arab Maghreb countries. Our study demonstrate that the political stability can decrease investment risk in these countries. The administrations correspondingly require expanding their rules and strategies with union demonstrations which were at the beginning of the departure and closing of several foreign companies.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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