MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297061587 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15090415

Does FDI Promote the Resource Curse in Nigeria?

2022· article· en· W4297061587 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olatunji A. Shobande

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicNatural Resources and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign direct investmentGranger causalityEconomicsExchange rateCointegrationNatural resourceResource curseGross domestic productError correction modelCurseWelfareMonetary economicsInternational economicsMacroeconomicsMarket economyEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated whether Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) supported the resource curse hypothesis in Nigeria. The precise methodological contribution was based on the Vector Error Correction and Granger causality test. The finding showed cointegration among the variables, whereas the speed of adjustment was slightly low. Similarly, natural resource to gross domestic product, FDI, and exchange rate unidirectionally Granger cause economic welfare, whereas bidirectional Granger causality is observed between indicators of natural resources to export, trade, and economic welfare. The results clearly indicate that FDI and natural resource management could improve economic wellbeing, although with a cost of volatility in the exchange rate and utilisation of resources. Thus, the study recommends the urgent need for effective and efficient management of the country’s natural resources to attract foreign direct investment and generate growth that can contribute meaningfully to the welfare of the citizens. Likewise, there is a need to diversify oil resources to other non-natural resources for the economy to stimulate growth and reduce the vulnerability of the economy to external shocks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicNatural Resources and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207