Search results

This chapter investigates the long-run relationship between trade, financial openness, economic growth, and carbon dioxide emissions across 167 countries over the period 1970–2007.

We employ both standard panel least squares and dynamic Generalized Method of Moments approaches to overcome problems of mis-specification inherent in the prior literature.

We find a strong link between economic growth, trade, financial openness, and environment. For the entire sample and industrial countries, our results support the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC). Our results also suggest that while economic growth, trade financial, and openness reduce CO₂ emissions for all countries, the countries from the North appear to benefit more from trade and financial openness than the countries from the South in terms of reduction in CO₂ emissions.

The results imply that policy makers should not seek to limit efforts to link trade openness and financial liberalization to environmental quality but to set trade policy-making, economic growth, and financial liberalization in a broader context to take into account environmental concerns as these issues are inextricably linked.

This chapter extends the existing literature by comparing the extent to which trade openness and financial liberalization influence the carbon emissions in the North and South.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the impact of trade and financial sector openness and their simultaneous openness on financial development of South Asia.

To serve the purpose, a panel data set of four South Asian economies, namely, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, was constituted for the period spanning from 1996 to 2015. Along with the conventional panel unit root test and co-integration test, pooled mean group estimations were used to formulate the empirical findings.

The findings suggested a significant negative impact of financial openness and significant positive impact of trade openness on the financial development of South Asia. The empirical evidence did not support simultaneous openness of trade and financial sector for the studied region.

The study contributes to the existing literature by analyzing the effect of trade and financial openness on financial development of South Asia. The study provides substantial evidence to the stakeholders for formulating policies that can boost financial development of the region.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically examine the effects of financial liberalization and trade openness on the economic growth of two countries, namely, Pakistan and India for the period 1985-2014.

This study uses the autoregressive distributed lag technique, which allows mixed order of integration. In addition, it uses the principal component method to create an index for financial liberalization to examine how it affects the economic growth of the selected countries.

The findings reveal that in the short and long run, trade openness has positive effect on the Pakistan’s economic growth while the financial liberalization has positive impact only in the long run. In the case of India, both financial liberalization and trade openness positively and significantly influence the economic growth in the short and long run.

By comparing the results of both countries, trade openness and financial liberalization increase the economic growth of India more than that of Pakistan. These results suggest that Pakistan should consider appropriate positive policies regarding financial liberalization and trade openness to achieve high and stable economic growth in the future.

This study creates financial liberalization index by using the principal component analysis method to explain the role of financial liberalization in the economic growth of Pakistan and India. In addition, it makes comparison of the results based on which country benefits most from the liberalization of trade and financial sectors. Only very few studies have examined these countries, yet their results have remained inconclusive as well.

The purpose of this paper is to examine if the simultaneous openness to trade and capital account can promote financial sector development.

Based on a sample of 12 Arab countries over the period from 1985 to 2011, the data were analyzed using the dynamic and static panel data analysis. In particular, the authors apply three estimate techniques: the generalized method of moments, fixed effects and random effects.

The empirical results do not support the simultaneous openness hypothesis. Even trade and financial openness have an important separate role in enhancing financial sector development; their interaction effect is harmful. This empirical evidence indicates that opening Arab countries to both trade and capital account will not necessarily promote financial sector development.

Some Arab countries are not included in the study sample because of the lack of data.

The main implication of this study is: opening Arab countries for trade and capital account at the same time will not improve the development of financial sector.

The paper examines one of the most important issues in developing countries; where, the people want to know if the country openness to trade and finance will generate a social and economic welfare for them.

This study can be considered as one of the rare studies that examine the simultaneous openness issue in the developing countries. It recommends regulators and policy makers to take gradual steps toward adopting trade and financial openness in the Arab countries.

The study aims to empirically investigate the trends and determinants of labour productivity of the two broad sectors –industry and services – and their components, namely, manufacturing and market services sectors, in the case of major developing and developed economies of Asia-Pacific over the period 1980-2014 and make a comparison thereof.

The study uses econometric methodology of panel unit root tests, panel cointegration and group-mean full modified ordinary least squares (FMOLS).

The study finds that while capital deepening, government size, institutional quality, productivity of the other sector and financial openness affect productivity of all the sectors significantly, the impact of human capital and trade openness varies across sectors in the case of developing economies. Furthermore, the impact of technological progress becomes significant in the post-liberalization reforms period in the developing economies. The study further finds that capital deepening, human capital, government size, institutional quality, productivity of the other sector, government size and trade openness are significant determinants of productivity of all sectors of developed economies under consideration. However, the impact of technological progress is stronger for manufacturing sector than services and its components. Furthermore, while both equity and debt liabilities (as measures of financial openness) influence sectoral productivity of industry and manufacturing sectors positively and significantly in case of developed economies, only equity liabilities have a significant influence on the productivity of developing economies. This may indicate existence of more developed financial markets in the case of developed economies.

The study identifies important structural differences in determinants of productivity both across sectors and across developing and developed economies of Asia-Pacific.

The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the age-old trade-and-economic-growth controversy. The authors do so by utilizing the data relating to the G-20 countries between 1988 and 2013.

The authors seek to establish the formal statistical links between openness to trade and economic growth in the context of interactions with financial depth, gross capital formation, and foreign direct investment. The authors use a panel vector autoregressive model to obtain the estimates. The authors check for the robustness of the results.

The authors find that all the variables are cointegrated. That is, there is a long-run equilibrium relationship between the variables. Moreover, trade openness, financial depth, gross capital formation, and foreign direct investment are all causative factors for the economic growth of the G-20 countries in the long run. At the same time, the short-run results demonstrate that there is a myriad of causal links between these variables.

The decision makers in the G-20 countries wishing to encourage economic growth in the long run should pay close attention to trade openness, financial depth, gross capital formation, and foreign direct investment inflows to their countries.

The authors study an important group of countries over a long span of time, using advanced panel data techniques. The results demonstrate that future studies on economic growth that do not simultaneously consider trade openness, financial depth, foreign direct investment, and gross capital formation will offer biased or misguided results.

This paper investigates the main drivers of foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows for a balanced panel of 11 Middle East and North Africa (MENA) economies over the 1995–2017 annual period. The author postulates that the impacts of the main pull (growth) and push (global financial conditions, GFC) factors may not be invariant to endogenously estimated thresholds for structural domestic conditions (SDCs) including trade and capital account openness, financial development, human capital (HC) and natural resource endowments.

The author investigates whether the main SDC provide endogenous thresholds for the impacts of basic pull and push factors on FDI inflows for the MENA sample by employing panel fixed effects threshold procedure of Hansen (1999). As a robustness check, the author also present the results of the dynamic panel data two-step system generalized method of moments (GMM) estimation, which explicitly consider the potential endogeneity of SDC along with main pull factor for the evolution of FDI inflows.

Growth, GFC and SDC are important drivers of FDI inflows. The impacts of SDC tend to be higher in countries with higher financial depth, openness to international trade and finance and lower natural resource and HC endowments. The sensitivities of FDI inflows to GFC are substantially higher in the countries which are more open to international trade and capital flows and higher levels of financial depth. FDI inflows are found to be pro-cyclical and this pro-cyclicality tends to be much higher for the episodes exceeding the SDC thresholds.

Improving SDC including higher openness to international trade and finance and financial development may be effective in encouraging FDI inflows. The findings support an argument that, better SDC are crucially important not only for attracting FDI but also achieving the growth benefits of FDI inflows. Therefore, improving SDC appears to be an important growth-oriented policy agenda for emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) including MENA.

The impacts of the main push and pull factors on FDI (and capital) inflows may be nonlinear. The literature often tackles the nonlinearity issue either by some interaction specifications or imposing exogenous thresholds. The literature, however, is yet to comprehensively investigate whether the main SDC provide endogenous thresholds for the impacts of basic pull and push factors. The author aims to contribute to the literature by estimating endogenous SDC threshold levels for the impacts of the main determinants of FDI flows for MENA.

The greatest challenge facing most economies today is how to grow their economies and reduce over-dependence on imports in the midst of increasing integration of world economies. Addressing this challenge seems to be difficult despite all efforts by policymakers at different times to salvage the situation, the problem persists as evident in the global financial crisis of 2008 and the Eurozone crisis of 2012 which were generally viewed as a glaring illustration of limitless pursuit of economic integration and governance failure at the expense of carefulness, prudence, due diligence, and regulation. It also reflects the lack of proper coordination and lack of proper economic integration facing most emerging market economies of the world. Against this background, this study focuses on the reexamination of the impact of trade openness (TOP) and financial openness (FOP) on economic growth in emerging market economies. The direct and interaction effect of the both openness variables on economic growth in these markets is investigated using data from 2000 to 2017 adopted from World Development indicators of the World Bank. Over 30 emerging market economies covering Asia, Latin America, and Europe are included in the study. For empirical analysis, the study uses one measure of FOP: de facto (total capital flow) variables following Aizenman and Noy (2009) and a measure of TOP as total trade–GDP ratio. The study applies the Dynamic Panel Approach, that is, the Arellano–Bond GMM estimation technique and Granger Causality Test to address the objectives. The results of this study show that TOP has a positive and significant impact on all the countries studied, whereas FOP has positive but no significant impact on economic growth of these countries, implying that these countries have not harnessed the benefit of financial liberalization and integration. It is recommended that the emerging market economies should open not only their economies to trade but also open their economies to finance so as to reap the benefits of FOP and integration.

This study is motivated by the fact that even though many African countries have witnessed rapid growth, they have also experienced high volatility in the form of severe financial crises, especially in the last two decades. These developments naturally lead to the issue of whether, in a more integrated global economy, the relationship between growth and output volatility has changed. The phenomena have also raised questions on whether the growth–output volatility relationship can be linked to the growing pains seemingly associated with rising trade and financial integration. This chapter attempts to provide answer to these questions by providing insights on how trade and financial integration affect the relationship between growth and output volatility using data from selected Africa countries. The study explores in detail the relationship between growth and the volatility of output components (consumption and investment). Our main result is that there is a positive growth and output volatility impact of trade openness and integration with the international financial market. The relationship between growth and financial integration and investment volatility is stronger in the long run than in the short run, while the consumption volatility impact of trade openness is higher in the long run than in the short run, suggesting that countries that are more open to trade appear to face less severe trade-off between growth and volatility.

The purpose of this article is to examine the inter-relationship and direction of causality among three macroeconomic variables such as trade liberalization, financial development and economic growth.

The empirical analysis is based on the principal component analysis as method to construct financial development index (FDI), augmented Dickey–Fuller and Phillips–Perron tests as the unit root test, Johansen’s co-integration test and VECM for direction of causality in the long run among TOP, FDI and economic growth.

The empirical results confirmed that there exists a long-run association among trade openness, financial development and economic growth. This study has also found that there is bidirectional causality between financial development and growth. However, the causality runs from growth to finance is stronger than that from finance to growth. This study also observed unidirectional causality that runs from financial development and economic growth to trade openness.

The policy implications that could be drawn from the present study is that, initiation of financial reforms to improve the size of financial system would lead to higher economic growth. Another key implication from this study is that because trade openness has no effect on both domestic financial sector development and output growth, it would be better to deploy the resources into creating a sustained domestic demand rather than concentrating more on the external front in general and trade openness in particular.

The study constructs a summary IFD for India by taking into account four broad financial development indicators for the period 1971-2012. The present paper also suggests that it would be better to deploy the resources to create a sustained domestic demand rather than concentrating more on the external front in general and trade openness in particular.