MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410790051 · doi:10.47604/ijecon.3358

The Impact of the Non-life Insurance Penetration on the Economic Growth of Developing Countries: Panel Data Analysis

2025· article· en· W4410790051 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ezdini Sihem

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanel dataDeveloping countryLife insurancePenetration (warfare)BusinessEconomicsActuarial scienceEconomic growthEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: This study explores the impact of non-life insurance industry performance on economic growth in 10 developing countries (Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, and Portugal). Methodology: Insurance penetration is measured through proxy such as non-life insurance with the time-series statistics covering the period from 1990 to 2021. The ordinary least square regression was adopted for the testing of the hypotheses. The results are based on panel data models and panel cointegration. Findings: The outcomes of the study showed that non-life insurance penetration had a substantially positive effect on the economic growth in 10 developing countries during the period from 1990 to 2021. The results based on panel data models and panel cointegration suggests that Non-life insurance has a positive and significant effect on the economic growth of the chosen countries. Also, it shows that the application of the rule of law had a positive effect on the developing economies. On the other hand, the higher the level of education, the more people are aware of the application of non-life insurance, which positively affects economic growth. Furthermore, culture and population density have a positive impact on economic growth. Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: The study recommends an improved modification in insurance products, especially in non-life businesses to availing clients the chance of choosing from a diversity of products. The study, therefore, recommends an increase in the awareness of non-life insurance services for its impact to be felt at all levels and to encourage participation.

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 score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of EconomicsSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207