Search results

South Asia has been an important destination of foreign aid over the past decades. Since a large part of aid is disbursed for social and economic infrastructure development in South Asian countries, and the volume of aid has tremendously increased in recent years, the purpose of this study is to investigate how far various categories of foreign aid affects economic growth rate in these countries. In addition, as the trend of each category of aid transfer appears to have been volatile, this study also investigates whether the volatilities inhibit growth rate in these countries.

In this study, South Asia refers to India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The Random effects approach is employed incorporating panel data for the period of 1995‐2008. The aggregate foreign aid is classified into various categories to have a comprehensive investigation.

Foreign aid positively associated with growth whereas the volatility of aid hurts it. Long‐impact aid promotes growth more than short‐impact aid does. The volatility of short‐impact aid hurts growth, whereas the volatility of long‐impact aid has no effect on it. Pure aid and its volatility have no effect on growth.

This study has identified the structure of foreign aid disbursed in these countries, and explored how far each category and respective volatility affects growth. These findings would be useful to the scholars and policy makers in the recipient countries as well as donors, to make foreign aid much more effective in future.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of predictors of growth (entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and environmental hostility) and growth itself on small-firm volatility. The objective is to find out: first, whether growth and volatility possess a similar nature; second, what are the predictors of small-firm volatility.

Questionnaire data were collected from CEOs of 433 Spanish small firms (<500 employees) who provided qualitative as well as quantitative information.

The authors find that some of the predictors on growth can also be used to predict firm volatility. Specifically, the authors find that firm volatility is influenced by EO and environmental hostility. Growth also influences firm volatility. The authors also find a strong interaction effect of growth and firm size on firm volatility. The authors conclude that although growth and firm volatility are related concepts, they are different.

Growth has concentrated small-firm research during the last 20 years. However, during the last few years, the environment has become very dynamic and small firms need research helping them to deal with such dynamism. There are few studies on firm-level volatility. The research helps understand more the determinants of small-firm volatility.

While a lot is known about organizational growth, little is understood about how to manage volatility that comes along with growth. This paper, using existing research in this area and the empirical findings of a study by Moreno et al. (2014), offers crucial insights about managing volatility for firms trying to grow at the pace of technological changes. An attempt is made to highlight the differences of growth and volatility in a language that is easily comprehensible to practitioners.

The paper is based on existing literature in the area of growth and on author’s personal interactions with the founders of small firms.

In this paper, it is argued that firm’s strategic orientations can be used as a contingency of growth–volatility relationship. In other words, firms with a strong entrepreneurial and market orientation are positioned to benefit from the pursuit of growth while still keeping the issues of volatility in control.

By clearly elucidating the concept of volatility and growth, the paper helps practitioners in finding ways of benefiting from growth and controlling unnecessary volatility.

This paper is among the limited research attempts addressing the concept of volatility. The finding that growth and volatility are inter-linked but different can be used effectively by practitioners.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is two‐fold. First, it studies whether output volatility and growth are linked at the firm‐level, using data for German firms. Second, it explores whether the link between volatility and growth depends on the degree of credit market imperfections. Design/methodology/approach – The authors use a novel firm‐level dataset provided by the Deutsche Bundesbank, the so‐called Financial Statements Data Pool. The dataset has time series observations for German firms for the period 1997‐2004, and the authors use information on the debt‐to‐assets or leverage ratio of firms to proxy for credit‐constraints at the firm‐level. As additional proxies for the importance of credit market imperfections, we use information on the size and on the legal status of firms. Findings – The authors find that higher volatility has a negative impact on growth for small and a positive impact for larger firms. Higher leverage is associated with higher growth. At the same time, there is heterogeneity in the determinants of growth across firms from different sectors and across firms with a different legal status. Practical implications – While most traditional macroeconomic models assume that growth and volatility are uncorrelated, a number of microeconomic models suggest that the two may be linked. However, it is unclear whether the link is positive or negative. The paper presents additional evidence regarding this question. Moreover, understanding whether credit market conditions affect the link between volatility and growth is of importance for policy makers since it suggests a channel through which the credit market can have long‐run welfare implications. The results stress the importance of firm‐level heterogeneity for the effects and effectiveness of economic policy measures. Originality/value – The paper has two main novel features. First, it uses a novel firm‐level dataset to analyze the determinants of firm‐level growth. Second, it analyzes the growth‐volatility nexus using firm‐level data. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first paper, which addresses the link between volatility, growth, and credit market imperfections using firm‐level data.

The purpose of this paper is twofold, first, to develop an effective tool to assess the performance of the overall economy by creating an assessment ratio that reflects the two top priorities of monetary policy, promoting economic growth and maintaining price stability, and second, to use the annual assessment ratios to build two subsamples, outperformance (better than the historical average) and underperformance, to examine and compare the changes in impacts of monetary and fiscal policy tools on important economic variables in different economic conditions, instead of different time periods.

The assessment ratio is defined as the gross domestic product (GDP) gap/standard deviation of inflation. Essentially, this Growth/Volatility ratio quantifies the price volatility-adjusted long-term output growth, that is, the long-term output growth given 1 per cent of the standard deviation of inflation. The growth has a positive impact on the ratio, while the effect of price volatility is negative. The ratio reflects not only the Fed’s dual goal but also the fundamental economic conditions. A higher value of the ratio indicates that the economy can better handle inflation risk in driving the long-term output growth. As the inflation level is adjusted in the numerator (GDP gap), not the denominator, no matter the Fed is engaging in the fight against inflation, or for reflation (promoting inflation) to prevent deflation and pursue price stability (Bernanke, 2002), the ratio remains consistent with the Fed’s dual goal and prefers a higher value.

Results of this study suggest that impacts of monetary and fiscal policy tools on key economic variables may be cyclic as the economic condition changes. The policy tools can significantly affect inflation volatility and the price volatility-adjusted long-term real output growth in the subpar economic conditions identified with lower assessment ratios. The effects become insignificant when the general economic performance exceeds the historical average. More importantly, results of this study indicate that the funds rate can effectively lower the price volatility, while the fiscal tools can promote long-term real output growth in the subpar economic conditions. Therefore, when inflation volatility spikes and the real output growth slows, the decisive and timely monetary and fiscal policy decisions become necessary to enhance policy effectiveness.

The assessments of effectiveness of monetary policy in the literature are based on some or all of four descriptive statistics: inflation, inflation volatility, output growth, and growth volatility. Each of them measures only one aspect of an economic phenomenon and cannot reflect the well-known conflicting relationship between maintaining price stability and promoting economic growth. For instance, from the policy perspective, a higher price volatility combined with a higher GDP growth rate for one period may or may not outperform another period with lower price volatility and growth rate. However, the assessment ratio created in this study considers both price volatility and economic growth simultaneously and can, therefore, be used as an effective measure of the overall economic performance.

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.

This paper seeks to revisit the highly debated trade‐growth hypothesis by considering the effects of trade and output volatility on the relationship between trade and economic growth.

The relationship is modeled by testing for the existence of output and trade (export and imports separately) using the conditional variances of the variables and then specifying an autoregressive conditional heteroskedastic (ARCH) process in a vector error correction model.

Using Singapore as a case study, the paper finds the two‐way relationship between export growth and trade‐adjusted GDP growth is robust even after controlling for the effects of income and export volatility. In addition, neither trade nor GDP volatility bears any impact on the bi‐directional causality between imports and unadjusted GDP growth thereby highlighting the crucial role of imports as intermediate inputs and embodying foreign technology in promoting economic growth. There is also evidence that output volatility impedes output and trade growth, while trade volatility exerts a negative influence on the trade‐adjusted income growth.

Ignoring the presence of trade and output volatility in modeling the trade‐growth relationship provides biased empirical results which have serious implications for trade‐oriented growth strategies that policy makers cannot afford to ignore.

This is the first attempt to explicitly model output, export and import volatility in empirically testing the trade‐growth hypothesis. Second, the robustness of the hypothesis is also tested by considering GDP and non‐trade GDP as it has been argued that use of GDP may lead to the problems of simultaneity and specification bias since exports and imports are themselves a component of GDP.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically examine the role of institutions on the remittances–output growth volatility relationship.

The data set of this paper is limited to 71 remittances recipient countries. In an attempt to deal with endogeneity issues, the paper adopts the use of system generalised method of moment (GMM).

First, in consonance with earlier studies, the growth volatility reducing influence of remittances flows was established. Second, unlike the extant literature, the growth volatility reduction potential of remittances was found to be more pronounced in the presence of well-functioning institutions. Finally, the interaction of remittances with our six institutional quality measures showed that growth volatility reduced considerably with better institutions.

In terms of policy, remittances recipient countries need to simultaneously pursue economic and governance reforms. Both of these will enhance the counter-cyclicality of remittances and possibly other capital flows.

Substantial efforts have been devoted to investigating the impact of remittances on output growth volatility, while very little research attention has been devoted to analysing the impact of institutions on the remittances–output growth volatility nexus.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role of institutions in the financial development-output growth volatility nexus. It provides new channels through which financial development can dampen the output growth volatilities of the countries under investigation.

A comprehensive data set for 71 countries covering the period from 1996 to 2012 and the System GMM approach were used. The choice of the methodology is to deal with endogeneity issues such as measurement errors, reverse causality among other issues.

A number of findings were emanated from the empirical analysis. First, the estimates provided evidence of the volatility-reducing effect of financial development. Second, institutions do not have the same reducing influence on output growth volatility. Third, the interaction of financial development and institutions showed that the output volatility reduction arising from financial development is enhanced in the presence of improved institutions.

The policy implications derived from this study are in twofolds: first, it is important for policymakers to formulate policies that would ensure and enhance the development of the financial sectors, since its importance in minimizing output volatility has been established. Second, institutional quality should be developed so as to further enhance the growth volatility-reducing influence of financial development. Particularly, institutions should be improved along the multiple dimensions captured in the analysis.

To the best knowledge, the novelty of this study to the literature is the introduction of institutions, which is hypothesized to increase the dampening effects of financial development in output growth volatility.

The purpose of this paper is to reveal the economic impact of policy reversals related to market liberalization reforms in China.

To perform the analysis, the authors hand-collect 59 financial market liberalization policy reversals from 1999 to 2017. These reversals are related to the liberalization of the stock market, bond market, derivatives market, forex market, lending market, and real estate market etc. The authors employ a stylized equilibrium interest rate model from Li et al. (2013) to deduce the impact of policy reversals on economic growth and the associated volatility after the announcement of each policy reversal.

First, the authors discover that about half of reversals are related to some tradeoff between the economic growth and the volatility associated with growth. Second, the authors also find that about a quarter of the reversals are detrimental to both the growth and the stability. These reversals, if known to policymakers, should be entirely avoided or corrected. Third, using a simple diagnostic test, the authors can identify detrimental reversals at the intra-day frequency by computing the change of the term spread and the volatility before and after the reversals.

The findings are useful for identifying effective policymaking in developing countries where mature democratic and rigorous policymaking processes are often lacking and formulating economic policies is challenging. The findings suggest that policy reversals serve China well by improving the quality of the policy made without posing destructive consequences to the existing economic infrastructure. This empirical evidence is important for a better understanding of the benefits of policy reversals on economic growth.

The empirical procedure provides a timely and objective evaluation of policy shifts, allowing for the general public to discern the rationale behind the policy decisions. Consequently, stakeholders’ trust and confidence in policymakers is enhanced so that the probability of the successful implementation of structural reforms may increase in these developing countries.

First, the results reveal some successful examples of Chinese policymaking in the path of liberalizing financial market. The authors find that the Chinese liberalization policy flip-flops have resulted in a more balanced growth on some occasions with reduced growth rate and volatility. Second, the proposed methodology provides an objective evaluation of policy shifts, allowing for the public to infer the general direction of the impact generated by policy shifts. Subsequently, stakeholders’ trust and confidence in policymakers can be enhanced and/or restored if the process of finding a successful path of structural reforms is unambiguous. Finally, the interest rate model also provides a timely method to evaluate the impact of policy shifts at an intra-day frequency, whereas most macroeconomic indicators are available at longer frequencies such as monthly or quarterly. The timeliness in understanding the economic consequences of policy reversals can be critical to prevent the destructive consequences of bad ones.