MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405425870 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17120559

The Impact of Shipping Connectivity on Environmental Quality, Financial Development, and Economic Growth in Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Countries

2024· article· en· W4405425870 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xhelil Bekteshi, Sevdie Alshiqi, Bartosz Jóźwik, Fatma Gul ALTİN, Mesut Doğan, Tatyana Petrossyants

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipBusinessEnvironmental qualityQuality (philosophy)FinanceEconomic growthNatural resource economicsEconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the relationship between shipping connectivity, environmental quality, financial development, and economic growth among 14 countries in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) from 2006 to 2019. Using panel-corrected standard error, Dynamic Seemingly Unrelated Regression, and Driscoll–Kraay estimation methods, the analysis reveals that shipping connectivity significantly contributes to financial development and economic growth, while also exerting a negative impact on environmental quality. These findings suggest that the maritime sector can have significant impacts not only on economic growth and financial development but also on environmental sustainability. In countries where maritime shipping has increased, particularly with the growth of trade, positive outcomes are observed in terms of financial development and economic growth, while negative impacts on environmental quality are also evident. This study provides insights for policymakers to develop strategies that maximize economic benefits while reducing environmental harm in order to achieve sustainable development in the maritime sector.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score0.893

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207