Download Free Capital Account Liberalization Financial Depth And Economic Growth Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Capital Account Liberalization Financial Depth And Economic Growth and write the review.

Shows a statistically significant and economically relevant effect of open capital accounts on financial deepness and economic growth in a cross-section of countries over the period 1986 to 1995.
This paper reviews the literature on the effects of capital account liberalization and stock market liberalization on economic growth. The various empirical measures used to gauge the presence of controls on capital account transactions as well as indicators of stock market liberalization are discussed. We compare detailed measures of capital account controls that attempt to capture the intensity of enforcement with others that simply capture whether or not controls are present. Our review of the literature shows the contrasting results that have been obtained. These differences may reflect differences in country coverage, sample periods and indicators of liberalization. In order to reconcile these differences, we present new estimates of the effects on growth of capital account liberalization and stock market liberalization. We find some support for a positive effect of capital account liberalization on growth, especially for developing countries.
This paper examines the distributional impact of capital account liberalization. Using panel data for 149 countries from 1970 to 2010, we find that, on average, capital account liberalization reforms increase inequality and reduce the labor share of income in the short and medium term. We also find that the level of financial development and the occurrence of crises play a key role in shaping the response of inequality to capital account liberalization reforms.
In this paper we reconsider the evidence on capital account liberalization and growth. While we find indications of a positive association, the effects vary with time, with how capital account liberalization is measured, and with how the relationship is estimated. The evidence that the effects of capital account liberalization are stronger in high-income countries is similarly fragile. There is some evidence that the positive growth effects of liberalization are stronger in countries with strong institutions, as measured by standard indicators of the rule of law, but only weak evidence that the benefits grow with a country's financial depth and development. We find more evidence of a correlation between capital account liberalization and growth when we allow the effect to vary with other dimensions of openness. There are two interpretations of this finding, one in terms of the sequencing of trade and financial liberalization, the other in terms of the need to eliminate major macroeconomic imbalances before opening the capital account. By and large our results support the second interpretation.
"Writings on the macroeconomic impact of capital account liberalization find few, if any, robust effects of liberalization on real variables. In contrast to the prevailing wisdom, I argue that the textbook theory of liberalization holds up quite well to a critical reading of this literature. The lion's share of papers that find no effect of liberalization on real variables tell us nothing about the empirical validity of the theory, because they do not really test it. This paper explains why it is that most studies do not really address the theory they set out to test. It also discusses what is necessary to test the theory and examines papers that have done so. Studies that actually test the theory show that liberalization has significant effects on the cost of capital, investment, and economic growth"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site.
Diploma Thesis from the year 2008 in the subject Business economics - Economic Policy, grade: 2.0, University of Osnabrück (Fachbereich Außenwirtschaft), language: English, abstract: During the recent decades, many countries decided to get access to international financial markets by liberalizing their capital accounts. As we will see in this paper, the issues of liberalization are very complex. Many different areas like, for example, growth, inflation or the labor market are affected by it. For some areas, empirical research supports theory and delivers sustainable and significant results. For others, theory is inconsistent or not supported by evidence from the real world. Some special ones, like for instance welfare or productivity, even show that it is important to split up the results to see whose welfare is increased or which's branch productivity is affected. Another interesting point is the connection between crises and capital account liberalization. Due to the financial crises that occurred in the aftermath of liberalization the concept has been controversially debated by academics for a long time. The real connection between these two issues is not yet clear. The structure of this paper is as follows. Section 2 will give short case studies of countries that liberalized their capital account. Section 3 is meant to endow the reader with some basic tools that will be important for the understanding of the concepts that will be presented later on in this paper. This includes definitions and conceptual ideas about measuring capital account liberalization. Section 4 focuses on the theory and empirical findings. In that section, the effects of liberalization on various macroeconomic variables will be presented. Section 5 follows the thoughts of the prior one by having a look at the implications that can be concluded from the theoretical and empirical findings that have been presented in the prior chapter. Section 6 discusses capital account liberalization with r
This paper examines whether there is a threshold above which financial development no longer has a positive effect on economic growth. We use different empirical approaches to show that there can indeed be "too much" finance. In particular, our results suggest that finance starts having a negative effect on output growth when credit to the private sector reaches 100% of GDP. We show that our results are consistent with the "vanishing effect" of financial development and that they are not driven by output volatility, banking crises, low institutional quality, or by differences in bank regulation and supervision.