scholarly journals Why Have Economic Reforms in Mexico Not Generated Growth?

2010 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 1005-1027 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J Kehoe ◽  
Kim J Ruhl
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Foreign Investment ◽  
Economic Reforms ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Theory ◽  
Real Gdp ◽  
Working Age ◽  
Catch Up

Following its opening to trade and foreign investment in the mid-1980s, Mexico's economic growth has been modest at best, particularly in comparison with that of China. Comparing these countries and reviewing the literature, we conclude that the relation between openness and growth is not a simple one. Using standard trade theory, we find that Mexico has gained from trade, and by some measures, more so than China. We sketch out a theory in which developing countries can grow faster than the United States by reforming. As a country becomes richer, this sort of catch-up becomes more difficult. Absent continuing reforms, Chinese growth is likely to slow down sharply, perhaps leaving China at a level less than Mexico's real GDP per working-age person. (JEL E23, E65, F14, O10, O20, O47)

Markets, Technological Change and Economic Growth (The Quaid-i-Azam Lecture)

1994 ◽  
Vol 33 (4I) ◽  
pp. 327-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard G. Lipsey
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
The United States ◽  
Industrial Countries ◽  
Canadian Institute ◽  
Primary Focus ◽  
Short Time

I am honoured to be invited to give this lecture before so distinguished an audience of development economists. For the last 21/2 years I have been director of a project financed by the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research and composed of a group of scholars from Canada, the United States, and Israel.I Our brief is to study the determinants of long term economic growth. Although our primary focus is on advanced industrial countries such as my own, some of us have come to the conclusion that there is more common ground between developed and developing countries than we might have first thought. I am, however, no expert on development economics so I must let you decide how much of what I say is applicable to economies such as your own. Today, I will discuss some of the grand themes that have arisen in my studies with our group. In the short time available, I can only allude to how these themes are rooted in our more detailed studies. In doing this, I must hasten to add that I speak for myself alone; our group has no corporate view other than the sum of our individual, and very individualistic, views.

Aid, China, and Growth: Evidence from a New Global Development Finance Dataset

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-174
Author(s):  
Axel Dreher ◽  
Andreas Fuchs ◽  
Bradley Parks ◽  
Austin Strange ◽  
Michael J. Tierney
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Financial Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Development ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Development Finance ◽  
Percentage Points ◽  
Overall Effectiveness

This article introduces a new dataset of official financing from China to 138 developing countries between 2000 and 2014. It investigates whether Chinese development finance affects economic growth in recipient countries. The results demonstrate that Chinese development finance boosts short-term economic growth. An additional project increases growth by between 0.41 and 1.49 percentage points 2 years after commitment, on average. While this study does not find that significant financial support from China impairs the overall effectiveness of aid from Western donors, aid from the United States tends to be more effective in countries that receive no substantial support from China. (JEL F35, O19, O47, P33, P34)

scholarly journals Comparative empirical analysis of temporal relationships between construction investment and economic growth in the United States

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 85-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Navid Ahmadi ◽  
Mohsen Shahandashti
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
The United States ◽  
Longitudinal Impact ◽  
Real Gdp ◽  
Leading Indicator ◽  
Temporal Relationships ◽  
The U.S

The majority of policymakers believe that investments in construction infrastructure would boost the economy of the United States (U.S.). They also assume that construction investment in infrastructure has similar impact on the economies of different U.S. states. In contrast, there have been studies showing the negative impact of construction activities on the economy. However, there has not been any research attempt to empirically test the temporal relationships between construction investment and economic growth in the U.S. states, to determine the longitudinal impact of construction investment on the economy of each state. The objective of this study is to investigate whether Construction Value Added (CVA) is the leading (or lagging) indicator of real Gross Domestic Product (real GDP) for every individual state of the U.S. using empirical time series tests. The results of Granger causality tests showed that CVA is a leading indicator of state real GDP in 18 states and the District of Columbia; real GDP is a leading indicator of CVA in 10 states and the District of Columbia. There is a bidirectional relationship between CVA and real GDP in 5 states and the District of Columbia. In 8 states and the District of Columbia, not only do CVA and real GDP have leading/lagging relationships, but they are also cointegrated. These results highlight the important role of the construction industry in these states. The results also show that leading (or lagging) lengths vary for different states. The results of the comparative empirical analysis reject the hypothesis that CVA is a leading indicator of real GDP in the states with the highest shares of construction in the real GDP. The findings of this research contribute to the state of knowledge by quantifying the temporal relationships between construction investment and economic growth in the U.S. states. It is expected that the results help policymakers better understand the impact of construction investment on the economic growth in various U.S. states.

Power and Inequality in Megaregulation: The TPP Model

2019 ◽  
pp. 124-139
Author(s):  
B. S. Chimni
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Foreign Investment ◽  
Economic Globalization ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Matrix

Neo-Marxist approaches have begun again to exercise influence in contemporary critiques of globalization. This chapter sketches a transnational and national class-based analysis of international trade-regulatory agreements, using the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) as the representative ideal type. With this framework, it looks at the implications of the TPP model for developing countries in the area of foreign investment and intellectual property rights in the matrix of the recent evolution of these two regimes. It further examines strategies available to the United States and India as their different domestic class constellations struggle over the countries’ political positioning towards economic globalization.

Can India Balance China in Asia?

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Holslag
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Central Asia ◽  
Economic Reforms ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Military Power ◽  
Regional Power ◽  
Political Fragmentation ◽  
Strong Interest ◽  
The One

The chapter argues that India has a strong interest to balance China and that the two Asian giants will not be able grow together without conflict. However, India will not be able to balance China’s rise. The chapter argues that India remains stuck between nonalignment and nonperformance. On the one hand, it resists the prospect of a new coalition that balances China from the maritime fringes of Eurasia, especially if that coalition is led by the United States. On the other hand, it has failed to strengthen its own capabilities. Its military power lags behind China’s, its efforts to reach out to both East and Central Asia have ended in disappointment, and its economic reforms have gone nowhere. As a result of that economic underachievement, India finds itself also torn between emotional nationalism and paralyzing political fragmentation, which, in turn, will further complicate its role as a regional power.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document