Push vs. Pull Factors of Capital Flows Revisited: A Cross-country Analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae Soo Kang ◽  
Kyunghun KIim
2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae Soo Kang ◽  
Kyunghun Kim

This paper examines the major determinants of net capital inflows. To account for meaningful differences in responses, 47 countries used for the empirical analysis are divided into advanced economies (AEs) and emerging market economies (EMEs). These countries are further divided into subgroups to consider the heterogeneous determinants for AEs and EMEs. Our empirical examination reveals notable heterogeneity across country groups. Both push and pull factors are statistically significant in AEs, but push factors play a larger role for EMEs, though pull factor influence is observed in a few EME subgroups. Our empirical findings are robust to alternative model specifications, alternative measures of capital flows and interest rates, as well as the use of an alternative sample period.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (194) ◽  
Author(s):  
Diego Cerdeiro ◽  
Andras Komaromi

We reassess the connection between capital account openness and capital flows in an empirical framework that is grounded in theory and makes use of previously unexplored variation in the data. We demonstrate how our theory-consistent regressions may overcome some ubiquitous measurement problems in the literature by relying on interaction terms between financial openness and traditional push-pull factors. Within our proposed framework, we ask: what can be said robustly about the effect of capital account restrictions on capital flows? Our results warrant against over-interpreting the existing cross-country evidence as we find very few robust relationships between capital account restrictiveness and various types of capital inflows. Countries with a higher degree of financial openness are more susceptible to some, but by no means all, push and pull factors. Overall, the results are still consistent with a complex set of tradeoffs faced by policymakers, where the ability to shield the domestic economy from volatile capital flow cycles must be weighed against the sources of exogenous risks and potential long run growth effects.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. 1297-1316
Author(s):  
O.N. Terent'eva

Subject. The stable supply of food to people is a cornerstone for the national economic security, while a lack of food or its expensiveness may undermine the economy, principles of power, and cause panics and wars. Malnutrition and hunger are critical indicators of the insufficient foods supply. Objectives. The article indicates which countries have high risk of hunger, and predicts its further movement. I also evaluate factual trends in the availability of food across countries. Methods. The study refers to statistical data in public domain, including the FAOSTAT. I apply methods of ranking, abstraction, prediction. Results. I performed the cross-country analysis and discovered that 117 countries demonstrated signs of malnutrition. The article sets forth a technique for splitting countries into five groups by level of hunger risk. The article compares data on hunger in the countries and consequences of mortality and morbidity. I ranked countries by key types of agricultural products and explained their production growth rates for a span of 18 years. I predicted how countries would be ranked in terms of hunger from 2030 to 2050, and found the extent to which the hunger risk will escalate in more flourishing countries. Conclusions and Relevance. Hunger and shortage of food seem invincible in the countries where people are hungry or very hungry. Sometimes it appears almost impossible for respective governments to solve the issue. Triggering the systemic hunger, such factors and premises are beyond control of starving countries. Hence, the international community should provide their support and aid to them.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document