STATA Output: Interpretation of the Dummy Variable

[Guest]

Hello everbody,

this is my first post in this forum, I hope I do not make any mistakes by posting this "newbie" question. English is not my native language but I will give my best to express myself correctly.

I am new in the STATA world and there is a specific paper which I am analyzing right now. You can find the output of the econometrical investigation attached. I am struggling to understand the "Mauritian Dummy" witch its values 1.46 and 1.89. The author states: "...dummy for Mauritius is significant and positive. In other words the cross-country growth regression is inadequate in explaining Mauritian growth performance."
I am able to interpret the other coefficients etc. but how does STATA calculate the Mauritian dummy? Is this variable a combination of all the independent variables above?

Thanks for your help

[Nick Cox]

You're asking us to comment on results from a paper without authors, title or source.

Still, I can guess wildly.

Stata [NB not STATA] isn't calculating a Mauritian dummy here.

This would, presumably, be a dummy variable in the authors' dataset that is 1 for Mauritius and 0 otherwise. What you are seeing is a coefficient estimate for each regression, not a variable that is being generated.

[Guest]

Sorry for that and thanks for your answer. The name of the paper is: "Who can explain the Mauritian miracle: Meade, Romer, Sachs or Rodrik?" by Arvind Subramanian and Devesh Roy.
If someone is interested in reading it: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft...01/wp01116.pdf

I am still not quite sure why the author states that the cross-country growth regression is inadequate in explaining Mauritian growth performance. I do not understand the link between the estimated coefficient 1.46 and the GDP growth rate. Maybe you can give me some informations about the interpretation of the estimated coefficient?

Thanks a lot

[Carlo Lazzaro]

Guest:
as far as I can get it, in the conclusion of the paper Authors state that Mauritius is an outlier (that is, it showed an outstanding economic performance vs other countries).
Hence, they suggest that the regression models should consider some other predictors to explain Mauritian exceptional growth.
Sorry I cannot be more helpful.

[Guest]

Thanks for your reply Carlo. Unfortunately I am still struggling to understand the specific interpretation of the estimated "Mauritian Dummy" Coefficient and its causes for the regression model.