Advances in Econometrics is a series of research annuals first published in 1982 by JAI Press. In this paper, we present a brief history of the series over its first 30 years. We describe key events in the history of the volume, and give information about the key contributors: editors, editorial board members, Advances in Econometrics Fellows, and authors who have contributed to the great success of the series.
This chapter presents an exposition of the Generalized Fechner–Thurstone (GFT) direct utility function, the system of demand functions derived from it, other systems of…
This chapter presents an exposition of the Generalized Fechner–Thurstone (GFT) direct utility function, the system of demand functions derived from it, other systems of demand functions from which it can be derived, and its purpose and the econometric circumstances that motivated its original development. Its use in econometrics is demonstrated by an application to household consumer survey data which explores the relationship between prices, on the one hand, and expected exogenous preference changers such as household size, schooling of heads of household, and other social factors, on the other.
The collection of chapters in this 30th volume of Advances in Econometrics provides a well-deserved tribute to Thomas B. Fomby and R. Carter Hill, who have served as editors of the Advances in Econometrics series for 25 and 21 years, respectively. Volume 30 contains a more varied collection of chapters than previous volumes, in essence mirroring the wide variety of econometric topics covered by the series over 30 years. Volume 30 starts with a chapter discussing the history of this series over the last 30 years. The next five chapters can be broadly categorized as focusing on model specification and testing. Following this section are three contributions that examine instrumental variables models in quite different settings. The next four chapters focus on applied macroeconomics topics. The final chapter offers a practical guide to conducting Monte Carlo simulations.
Corruption was ranked among the top five biggest obstacles affecting the operation of enterprises in Africa and was rated as a severe obstacle by close to 40 percent of…
Corruption was ranked among the top five biggest obstacles affecting the operation of enterprises in Africa and was rated as a severe obstacle by close to 40 percent of firms in the sample. Consequently, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between corruption and firm level productivity.
This paper uses the Enterprise Survey Data Set of the World Bank and employs an instrumental variable (IV) approach to deal with the potential endogeneity of corruption in a productivity equation. The authors use industry-country averages of the bribe tax and time tax as well as a dummy of female ownership as IVs.
Using three different measures of corruption, the authors find evidence that corruption “sands the wheels of commerce” and hence dampens firm-level productivity even when the endogeneity of corruption is controlled for. The authors find no evidence to support the trade-off between bribe payments and the red tape suggesting that government officials deliberately use bureaucracy as a mechanism of trapping the most productive firms that can afford to pay higher bribes. Hence this study lends no support to the “greasing” hypothesis.
The results thus suggest that in the second best choice environment firms are still not better off paying bribes rather mitigating corruption could be ideal. Therefore alongside existing regulatory corruption mitigants in the respective African countries, the paper suggests that government through public information dissemination ought to enlighten firms that corruption is not productivity enhancing. Thus firms are better-off evading corruption tendencies than propagating them.
The contribution to empirical literature is that much of the empirical studies have overly concentrated on Europe and Asia and with very limited evidence available for African countries. Therefore in terms of extending the work of McAuthar and Teal (2002) and Fisman and Svensson (2007), the authors argue that by using a new data set stretching from 2006 to as recent as 2017 the paper is rightly placed to make an empirical contribution about the relationship between corruption and firm-level productivity.