MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285126655 · doi:10.55365/1923.x2022.20.6

The Relationship Between Inclusion, Financial Innovation and Economic Growth in Sub-Saharan African Countries: A PVAR Approach

2022· article· en· W4285126655 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jo�ão Jungo, Mara Madaleno, Anabela Botelho

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economics and Finance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMicrofinance and Financial Inclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsFinancial inclusionCausality (physics)Autoregressive modelEconomicsInvestment (military)Inclusion (mineral)Sample (material)OriginalityGranger causalityMonetary economicsMacroeconomicsFinanceEconometricsFinancial servicesPolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this paper is to examine the relationship between inclusion, financial innovation, and economic growth.The goal is to verify the existence of a bidirectional relationship between the three variables.For this purpose, we use the Panel Vector Autoregressive (PVAR) model in the Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) on data from 46 Sub-Saharan African countries.The results confirm the existence of a positive and unidirectional relationship between economic growth and financial innovation and the existence of a unidirectional relationship between financial inclusion and economic growth.Additionally, our results show that there is a bidirectional relationship between economic growth and investment.Regarding practical implications, this study jointly analyzes three current and interrelated topics that pose a problem for the African continent and expands the scarce literature on financial development and economic growth.As for originality, this study considers the possibility of a bidirectional relationship between inclusion, financial innovation, and economic growth using a sample of 46 sub-Saharan African countries covering the period 2005-2018, a fact that was ignored in previous studies when they examined only unidirectional causality.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economics and FinanceSame topicMicrofinance and Financial InclusionFrench-language works237,207