Do Imf-Supported Programs Work? A Survey of the Cross-Country Empirical Evidence

1998 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadeem Ul Haque ◽  
Mohsin S. Khan
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
The Cross

Linkages between cross-country business cycles, cross-country stock market cycles and cross-country real estate market cycles

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Hiang Liow
Keyword(s):  
Real Estate ◽  
Stock Market ◽  
Business Cycles ◽  
Spillover Effects ◽  
Real Estate Market ◽  
Stock Market Index ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Market Index ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
The Cross

Purpose This research aims to investigate whether and to what extent the co-movements of cross-country business cycles, cross-country stock market cycles and cross-country real estate market cycles are linked across G7 from February 1990 to June 2014. Design/methodology/approach The empirical approaches include correlation analysis on Hodrick–Prescott (HP) cycles, HP cycle return spillovers effects using Diebold and Yilmaz’s (2012) spillover index methodology, as well as Croux et al.’s (2001) dynamic correlation and cohesion methodology. Findings There are fairly strong cycle-return spillover effects between the cross-country business cycles, cross-country stock market cycles and cross-country real estate market cycles. The interactions among the cross-country business cycles, cross-country stock market cycles and cross-country real estate market cycles in G7 are less positively pronounced or exhibit counter-cyclical behavior at the traditional business cycle (medium-term) frequency band when “pure” stock market cycles are considered. Research limitations/implications The research is subject to the usual limitations concerning empirical research. Practical implications This study finds that real estate is an important factor in influencing the degree and behavior of the relationship between cross-country business cycles and cross-country stock market cycles in G7. It provides important empirical insights for portfolio investors to understand and forecast the differential benefits and pitfalls of portfolio diversification in the long-, medium- and short-cycle horizons, as well as for research studying the linkages between the real economy and financial sectors. Originality/value In adding to the existing body of knowledge concerning economic globalization and financial market interdependence, this study evaluates the linkages between business cycles, stock market cycles and public real estate market cycles cross G7 and adds to the academic real estate literature. Because public real estate market is a subset of stock market, our approach is to use an original stock market index, as well as a “pure” stock market index (with the influence of real estate market removed) to offer additional empirical insights from two key complementary perspectives.

scholarly journals How Fast Are the Tourism Countries Growing? The Cross-country Evidence

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rinaldo Brau ◽  
Alessandro Lanza ◽  
Francesco Pigliaru
Keyword(s):  
Cross Country ◽  
The Cross

scholarly journals Measuring Total Factor Productivity: Accounting for cross country differences in income per capita // Мјерење укупне факторске продуктивности: обрачун међудржавних разлика у БДП-у по раднику

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (19) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Stevo Pucar ◽  
Zoran Borovic
Keyword(s):  
Total Factor Productivity ◽  
Factor Productivity ◽  
Productivity Measurement ◽  
Production Factors ◽  
First Pass ◽  
Development Accounting ◽  
Proximate Determinants ◽  
Country Differences ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
The Cross

Summary: Why are some countries so much richer than others? Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others? Influential works by Klenow & Rodriguez-Clare (1997), Hall and Jones (1999), and Parente & Prescott (2000), among others, have argued that most of the cross country differences in output per worker is explained by differences in total factor productivity. Total factor productivity measurement enables researchers to determine the contribution of supply-side production factors to economic growth. Development Accounting is a first-pass attempt at organizing the answer around two proximate determinants: factors of production and efficiency. It answers the question “how much of the cross-country income variance can be attributed to differences in (physical and human) capital, and how much to differences in the efficiency with which capital is used’’?In this article, we will outline framework for growth accounting to account for cross-country difference in income of Republic of Srpska, Republic of Croatia and Republic of Serbia. The current consensus is that differences in income per worker across countries do not arise primarly from differences in quantities in capital or labour, but rather from differences in efficiency with which are these factors used. We find that total factor productivity is very important for the growth of output per worker, but only in cases of Serbia and Croatia. In case of Srpska the most important factor for the growth of output per worker is growth of capital.Резиме: Зашто су неке земље толико богатије од других? Зашто неке земље остварују много већи обим производње по раднику од других? Утицајни радови Klenow и Rodriguez-Clare (1997), Hall и Jones (1999), и Parente и Prescott (2000), између осталих, тврдили су да је највећи број међудржавних разлика у обиму производње по раднику резултат разлика у Укупној Факторској Продуктивности. Мјерење Укупне Факторске Продуктивности омогућава истраживачима да утврде допринос фактора на страни понуде привредном расту. Развој ‘’рачуноводства раста’’ представља први покушаја анализирања двије сродне детерминанте раста: фактори производње и ефикасности.  Ова анализа даје одговор на питање “колико су међудржавне разлике у оствареном БДП-у резултат међудржавних разлика у (физичком и људском) капиталу, а колико су резултат разлика у ефикасности којом се капитал користи’’?У овом раду ћемо приказати оквир за “рачуноводство раста’’ који ће се примјенити за обрачун међудржавних разлика у БДП-у по раднику за Републику Српску, Републику Хрватску и Републику Србију. Тренутни консензус међу ауторима је да разлике у БДП-у по раднику између земаља не настају првенствено због разлика у количинама капитала или рада, него због разлика у ефикасности са којом се ови фактори користе. Анализом смо дошли до закључка да је Укупна Факторска Продуктивност веома важна за раст производње по раднику, али само у случајевима Србије и Хрватске. У случају Српске најважнији фактор за раст производње по раднику је раст техничко-технолошке опремљености рада капиталом.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document