Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Stiglitz is Rethinking Development Economics
Joe Stiglitz has published a short paper titled Rethinking Development Economics in the World bank Research Observer. See here.
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Empirical Evidence on Satisfaction with Privatization in Latin America
This article is interesting.
Empirical Evidence on Satisfaction with Privatization in Latin America
World Bank Econ Rev 2011.
Céline Bonnet*,
Pierre Dubois†,
David Martimort‡ and
Stéphane Straub§
↵§Stéphane Straub (corresponding author), Toulouse School of Economics (ARQADE and IDEI), Tel: (33) 561128529, stephane.straub@univ-tlse1.fr.
↵* Celine Bonnet, Toulouse School of Economics (GREMAQ, INRA), celine.bonnet@tse-fr.eu.
↵† Pierre Dubois, Toulouse School of Economics (GREMAQ, INRA, IDEI), pierre.dubois@tse-fr.eu.
↵‡ David Martimort, Paris School of Economics, martimor@parisschoolofeconomics.eu.
Abstract
Since the 1980s, privatization of formerly state-owned firms has been extensively implemented by governments across Latin America. Despite the fact that most evaluations of the process fail to find significant adverse efficiency and welfare effects, there has been a strong surge in public discontent with such policy in the region. This paper performs a systematic empirical analysis of the determinants of such dissatisfaction, using survey data from Latinobarometro covering 17 countries over the period 1998-2008, complemented by country level data on macroeconomic, political, and institutional aspects as well as data on privatization. Dissatisfaction appears to respond to absolute and relative welfare effects, and we find a robust U-shaped effect in term of education and income levels, with individuals in the middle of such distributions being more critical with the outcome of privatizations.
Empirical Evidence on Satisfaction with Privatization in Latin America
World Bank Econ Rev 2011.
Céline Bonnet*,
Pierre Dubois†,
David Martimort‡ and
Stéphane Straub§
↵§Stéphane Straub (corresponding author), Toulouse School of Economics (ARQADE and IDEI), Tel: (33) 561128529, stephane.straub@univ-tlse1.fr.
↵* Celine Bonnet, Toulouse School of Economics (GREMAQ, INRA), celine.bonnet@tse-fr.eu.
↵† Pierre Dubois, Toulouse School of Economics (GREMAQ, INRA, IDEI), pierre.dubois@tse-fr.eu.
↵‡ David Martimort, Paris School of Economics, martimor@parisschoolofeconomics.eu.
Abstract
Since the 1980s, privatization of formerly state-owned firms has been extensively implemented by governments across Latin America. Despite the fact that most evaluations of the process fail to find significant adverse efficiency and welfare effects, there has been a strong surge in public discontent with such policy in the region. This paper performs a systematic empirical analysis of the determinants of such dissatisfaction, using survey data from Latinobarometro covering 17 countries over the period 1998-2008, complemented by country level data on macroeconomic, political, and institutional aspects as well as data on privatization. Dissatisfaction appears to respond to absolute and relative welfare effects, and we find a robust U-shaped effect in term of education and income levels, with individuals in the middle of such distributions being more critical with the outcome of privatizations.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Legal Institutions, Innovation and Growth
This paper looks interesting.
Legal Institutions, Innovation and Growth
LUCA ANDERLINI, Georgetown University - Department of Economics
Email: la2@georgetown.edu
LEONARDO FELLI, London School of Economics - Department of Economics, CESifo (Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute for Economic Research), Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)
Email: lfelli@econ.lse.ac.uk
GIOVANNI IMMORDINO, Università degli Studi di Salerno - Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF)
Email: GIIMMO@TIN.IT
ALESSANDRO RIBONI, University of Montreal - Department of Economics
Email: alessandro.riboni@umontreal.ca
We analyze the relationship between legal institutions, innovation and growth. We compare a rigid (law set ex-ante) legal system and a flexible one (law set after observing current technology). The flexible system dominates in terms of welfare, amount of innovation and output growth at intermediate stages of technological development - periods when legal change is needed. The rigid system is preferable at early stages of technological development, when (lack of) commitment problems are severe. For mature technologies the two legal systems are equivalent. We find that rigid legal systems may induce excessive (greater than first-best) R&D investment and output growth.
Legal Institutions, Innovation and Growth
LUCA ANDERLINI, Georgetown University - Department of Economics
Email: la2@georgetown.edu
LEONARDO FELLI, London School of Economics - Department of Economics, CESifo (Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute for Economic Research), Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)
Email: lfelli@econ.lse.ac.uk
GIOVANNI IMMORDINO, Università degli Studi di Salerno - Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF)
Email: GIIMMO@TIN.IT
ALESSANDRO RIBONI, University of Montreal - Department of Economics
Email: alessandro.riboni@umontreal.ca
We analyze the relationship between legal institutions, innovation and growth. We compare a rigid (law set ex-ante) legal system and a flexible one (law set after observing current technology). The flexible system dominates in terms of welfare, amount of innovation and output growth at intermediate stages of technological development - periods when legal change is needed. The rigid system is preferable at early stages of technological development, when (lack of) commitment problems are severe. For mature technologies the two legal systems are equivalent. We find that rigid legal systems may induce excessive (greater than first-best) R&D investment and output growth.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Risk, Institutions and Growth: Why England and Not China?
There is a new and interesting paper by Avner Grief of Stanford's Economics Department, Risk, Institutions and Growth: Why England and Not China?
ABSTRACT: We analyze the role of risk-sharing institutions in transitions to modern economies. Transitions require individual-level risk-taking in pursuing productivity-enhancing activities including developing, adopting, and using new knowledge. Individual-level, idiosyncratic risk implies that distinct risk sharing institutions - even those providing the same level of insurance - can lead to different growth trajectories if they differently motivate risk-taking. Historically, risk sharing institutions were selected based on their cultural and institutional compatibility and not their unforeseen growth implications.
We simulate our growth model incorporating England's and China's distinct pre-modern risk-sharing institutions. The model predicts a transition in England and not China even with equal levels of risk sharing. Under the clan-based Chinese institution, the relatively risk-averse elders had more control over technological choices implying lower risk-taking.
Focusing on non-market institutions expands on previous growth-theoretic models to highlight that transitions can transpire even in the absence of exogenous productivity shocks or time-dependent state variables. Recognizing the role of non-market institutions in the growth process bridges the view that transitions are due to luck and the view that transitions are inevitable. Transitions transpire when 'luck' creates the conditions under which economic agents find it beneficial to make the choices leading to positive rates of technological change. Luck came in the form of historical processes leading to risk-sharing institutions whose unintended consequences encouraged productivity-enhancing risk-taking.
ABSTRACT: We analyze the role of risk-sharing institutions in transitions to modern economies. Transitions require individual-level risk-taking in pursuing productivity-enhancing activities including developing, adopting, and using new knowledge. Individual-level, idiosyncratic risk implies that distinct risk sharing institutions - even those providing the same level of insurance - can lead to different growth trajectories if they differently motivate risk-taking. Historically, risk sharing institutions were selected based on their cultural and institutional compatibility and not their unforeseen growth implications.
We simulate our growth model incorporating England's and China's distinct pre-modern risk-sharing institutions. The model predicts a transition in England and not China even with equal levels of risk sharing. Under the clan-based Chinese institution, the relatively risk-averse elders had more control over technological choices implying lower risk-taking.
Focusing on non-market institutions expands on previous growth-theoretic models to highlight that transitions can transpire even in the absence of exogenous productivity shocks or time-dependent state variables. Recognizing the role of non-market institutions in the growth process bridges the view that transitions are due to luck and the view that transitions are inevitable. Transitions transpire when 'luck' creates the conditions under which economic agents find it beneficial to make the choices leading to positive rates of technological change. Luck came in the form of historical processes leading to risk-sharing institutions whose unintended consequences encouraged productivity-enhancing risk-taking.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Call for Papers: 2011 Law and Development Institute Conference
The Law and Development Institute (LDI, www.lawanddevelopment.net) is pleased to announce a call for paper proposals for the 2011 annual conference, entitled, "Law and Development at the Microlevel: From Microtrade to Current Issues in Law and Development". The conference will be co-hosted with Seattle University School of Law on December 10, 2011. The LDI calls for papers on any aspect of microtrade, which is a new system of international trade designed to alleviate populations of least-developed countries of extreme poverty (for a concept paper, see http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1524185), as well as for papers on other law and development issues that can be considered broadly at the "micro level", including but not limited to: microfinance, microinsurance, green growth and development, etc.
Paper proposals should be limited to a 500 word abstract, which must be received by June 30 at the latest. Accepted conference papers should be completed by November 15 for circulation among the participants in advance of the conference. All proposals must be sent by email to the Law and Development Institute, info@lawanddevelopment.net (with a cc to wtogeneva@hotmail.com). The paper proposals will be peer-reviewed by members of the editorial board of the Law and Development Review (www.bepress.com/ldr). It is anticipated that paper selection will be completed by July 31, 2011. The selected authors will be invited to present their papers at the Conference. The conference venue is Seattle University School of Law, located in Seattle, United States. The invited speakers are expected to cover their own expenses to attend the conference.
Paper proposals should be limited to a 500 word abstract, which must be received by June 30 at the latest. Accepted conference papers should be completed by November 15 for circulation among the participants in advance of the conference. All proposals must be sent by email to the Law and Development Institute, info@lawanddevelopment.net (with a cc to wtogeneva@hotmail.com). The paper proposals will be peer-reviewed by members of the editorial board of the Law and Development Review (www.bepress.com/ldr). It is anticipated that paper selection will be completed by July 31, 2011. The selected authors will be invited to present their papers at the Conference. The conference venue is Seattle University School of Law, located in Seattle, United States. The invited speakers are expected to cover their own expenses to attend the conference.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Call for Papers: Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) conference to be held 20-22 October 2011
Submissions are due 30 May 2011 for the upcoming Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) conference to be held 20-22 October 2011. The theme is "Capitalism and the Common Good"
The call can be found here: http://waynemorsecenter.uoregon.edu/twail
Keynote Speaker:
B.S. Chimni (Centre for International Legal Studies School of International Studies Jawaharlal Nehru University)
Confirmed speakers include:
- Antony Anghie (Samuel D. Thurman Professor of Law at the University of Utah)
- Tayyab Mahmud (Professor of Law and Director, Center for Global Justice at Seattle University School of Law)
- Balakrishnan Rajagopal (Associate Professor of Law and Development and Director, MIT Program on Human Rights and Justice at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Publication Opportunities:
Select papers will be published in the Oregon Review of International Law. We are also investigating the possibility of a TWAIL book volume.
The call can be found here: http://waynemorsecenter.uoregon.edu/twail
Keynote Speaker:
B.S. Chimni (Centre for International Legal Studies School of International Studies Jawaharlal Nehru University)
Confirmed speakers include:
- Antony Anghie (Samuel D. Thurman Professor of Law at the University of Utah)
- Tayyab Mahmud (Professor of Law and Director, Center for Global Justice at Seattle University School of Law)
- Balakrishnan Rajagopal (Associate Professor of Law and Development and Director, MIT Program on Human Rights and Justice at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Publication Opportunities:
Select papers will be published in the Oregon Review of International Law. We are also investigating the possibility of a TWAIL book volume.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Law and Development Perspective on International Trade Law
There is an interesting new book out on Law and Development Perspective on International Trade Law (Cambridge University Press)
Edited by: Yong-Shik Lee, The Law and Development Institute, Sydney
Edited by: Gary Horlick, Georgetown University Law Center
Edited by: Won-Mog Choi, Ewha Womans University School of Law, Seoul
Edited by: Tomer Broude, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
BOOK ABSTRACT: Economic development is the most important agenda in the international trading system today, as demonstrated by the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) adopted in the current multilateral trade negotiations of the World Trade Organization (the Doha Round). This book provides a relevant discussion of major international trade law issues from the perspective of development in the following areas: general issues on international trade law and economic development; and specific law and development issues in World Trade Organization, Free Trade Agreement and regional initiatives. This book offers an unparalleled breadth of coverage on the topic and diversity of authorship, as seventeen leading scholars contribute chapters from nine major developed and developing countries, including the United States, Canada, Japan, China (including Hong Kong), South Korea, Australia, Singapore and Israel.
Contributors: Yong-Shik Lee, Tomer Broude, Bryan Mercurio, Maureen Irish, Faizel Ismail, Gary Horlick, Katherine Fennell, Andrew Mitchell, Joanne Wallis, Moche Hirsch, Mitsuo Matsushita, Anthony Cassimatis, Colin Picker, Caf Dowlah, Young-Ok Kim, Hye Seong Mun, Xiaojie Lu
Edited by: Yong-Shik Lee, The Law and Development Institute, Sydney
Edited by: Gary Horlick, Georgetown University Law Center
Edited by: Won-Mog Choi, Ewha Womans University School of Law, Seoul
Edited by: Tomer Broude, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
BOOK ABSTRACT: Economic development is the most important agenda in the international trading system today, as demonstrated by the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) adopted in the current multilateral trade negotiations of the World Trade Organization (the Doha Round). This book provides a relevant discussion of major international trade law issues from the perspective of development in the following areas: general issues on international trade law and economic development; and specific law and development issues in World Trade Organization, Free Trade Agreement and regional initiatives. This book offers an unparalleled breadth of coverage on the topic and diversity of authorship, as seventeen leading scholars contribute chapters from nine major developed and developing countries, including the United States, Canada, Japan, China (including Hong Kong), South Korea, Australia, Singapore and Israel.
Contributors: Yong-Shik Lee, Tomer Broude, Bryan Mercurio, Maureen Irish, Faizel Ismail, Gary Horlick, Katherine Fennell, Andrew Mitchell, Joanne Wallis, Moche Hirsch, Mitsuo Matsushita, Anthony Cassimatis, Colin Picker, Caf Dowlah, Young-Ok Kim, Hye Seong Mun, Xiaojie Lu
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)