Financial Development in Developing Countries and Its Impact on Economic Growth between 2008 and 2017
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines how the level of financial development has changed in the ten years between 2008 and 2017 in connection to the most significant events in the global economy and finance and how financial development has influenced economic growth in developing countries. The study measures financial development following the World Bank (2020) approach and using indicators of financial access, financial depth, financial efficiency and financial stability, corresponding to financial institutions and financial markets. Based on a two-way fixed effects model, we find that financial development has positively and significantly contributed to economic growth in these countries during the ten years between 2008 and 2017, through increased access of individual consumers and firms to financial products and services. Other variables such as the depth, efficiency and stability of financial institutions and markets do not correlate significantly with the economic growth of developing countries between 2008 and 2017. This paper concludes that the access to financial institutions for individuals living in developing nations is favourably and significantly connected to economic growth in these countries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".