MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385555060 · doi:10.3390/su151511955

The Nexus between Employment and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Analysis

2023· article· en· W4385555060 on OpenAlexaff
Azad Haider, Sunila Jabeen, Wimal Rankaduwa, Farzana Shaheen

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Nova ScotiaUniversity of Prince Edward IslandDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeveloping countryEconomicsNexus (standard)Developed countryLabour economicsOutput elasticityPopulationDevelopment economicsProduction (economics)Demographic economicsEconomic growthMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this paper is to examine the relationship between employment and economic growth in developed and developing countries over the period of 1970–2019. As documented in the literature in the past, economic growth in most developing countries has been less job-generating than in developed countries, even though high economic growth is observed in most of the developing world, indicating jobless growth. Based on the Cobb–Douglas production function, we developed an employment demand model to find the employment elasticity with respect to economic growth using working hours and population as explanatory variables. The main findings of the present study reveal that the employment elasticities with respect to GDP are positive and significant in developing and developed countries. But in the developing countries, the employment elasticity is relatively very low (0.11 to 0.15) compared to the developed countries (0.43 to 0.48), which led to the conclusion that a possibility of jobless growth exists in these countries. The findings of the study imply that policymakers should focus more on employment-led growth policies instead of growth-led employment policies, especially in developing 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations33
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequalityFrench-language works237,207