• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Minimizing Output Loss - Role of Political Factors during Economic Crisis: Lessons for Developing Countries.
【24h】

Minimizing Output Loss - Role of Political Factors during Economic Crisis: Lessons for Developing Countries.

机译：使产出损失最小化-经济危机期间政治因素的作用：发展中国家的经验教训。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The purpose of the dissertation is to understand the role of political factors during an economic crisis using a sample of developing countries. Variables are clustered in the categories of (a) prior economic performance, (b) economic policy, (c) economic characteristics, (d) institutional quality, (e) regional status, and (f) IMF involvement on the dependent variable of 144 developing countries' output loss from the crisis of 2008. The goal of the analysis is not merely to obtain a high R2 but also to identify and explore explanatory patterns in both linear and quantile regression carried out on the data, and to include infrequently studied institutional and political variables to the study of output loss.;The overall conclusion of the study is that countries growing rapidly before the crisis, and with relatively high GDP per capita, recovered faster than other countries. Social and financial policies were also found to be important. Countries with higher levels of financial openness and domestic credit suffered more during the crisis. In the presence of these controls, countries with higher numbers of veto players recovered more slowly from the crisis; however, the number of veto players was no longer significant when economic characteristics were added to the models. Indeed, as more explanatory variables are added to the models, and the more categories they cover, significantly fewer relationships were found between veto players and post-crisis economic recovery.;An interesting finding is that that democracy was significantly and negatively associated with output loss in all three models, indicating that democracy helped to protect against output loss. At the same time, political rights were significantly and positively associated with output loss in all three models, a finding that seems to be at odds with the observed democracy-output loss relationship. It is possible that the measure of political rights is conceptually related to trade or financial openness in that all three variables might measure some form of openness associated with inhibited decision-making or exposure to contagion. It might be the case that there were two distinct strategies employed successfully to minimize output loss: a democratic strategy and a "closed" strategy. The data suggest that output loss has much more to do with trade and financial openness, existing growth rates, and other economic fundamentals. In testing the second hypothesis, we observed a positive relationship between political rights and output loss; however, in that same hypothesis, we also saw that democracy exerted a protective factor on output loss. If we think in terms of R2, then institutional and governance variables did not contribute much to any of the models. The inference to reach is that the most open (in trade and finance) and fast-growing countries suffered the most because of their connectedness to other vulnerable portions of the global economy. These countries exhibited a great deal of variability in terms of their political orientations. The way to minimize the effects of crisis is not political repression, but rather a lesser degree of openness to international economic activity. One of the implications of this finding is that neither political and institutional changes nor IMF involvement are likely to minimize output loss from a crisis; the first developing countries to recover will be those that have already been experiencing high growth, that are already financially open, and that have higher GDPs per capita than their peers. However, it is possible that political and institutional variables become more important in a longer-term analysis, for example, over a period of 5 or 10 years post-recession. Therefore, the findings of the study should not be taken to indicate that political and institutional variables have no relevance to developing countries' long-term economic recovery.
机译：本文的目的是利用发展中国家的样本来了解政治因素在经济危机中的作用。变量分为以下几类：（a）先前的经济表现，（b）经济政策，（c）经济特征，（d）制度质量，（e）区域地位和（f）IMF参与因变量144发展中国家因2008年危机而遭受的产出损失。分析的目的不仅是获得较高的R2，而且还应确定和探索对数据进行的线性和分位数回归的解释模式，并包括不经常研究的制度研究的总体结论是，危机前增长迅速，人均国内生产总值较高的国家比其他国家恢复得更快。人们还发现社会和金融政策很重要。金融开放程度和国内信贷水平较高的国家在危机期间遭受的损失更大。在存在这些控制措施的情况下，拥有否决权的人数众多的国家从危机中恢复的速度较慢；但是，当将经济特征添加到模型中时，否决权参与者的数量不再重要。的确，随着模型中增加了更多的解释变量，并且涵盖了更多类别，否决权参与者与危机后经济复苏之间的关系就大大减少了；一个有趣的发现是，民主与产出损失显着负相关在所有三个模型中，这表明民主有助于防止产出损失。同时，政治权利在所有三个模型中均与产出损失显着正相关，这一发现似乎与观察到的民主与产出损失关系不符。政治权利的度量可能在概念上与贸易或金融开放性相关，因为所有三个变量都可能度量与受抑制的决策或传染性相关的某种形式的开放性。可能的情况是，成功采用了两种截然不同的策略来最大程度地减少产出损失：民主策略和“封闭”策略。数据表明，产出损失与贸易和金融开放程度，现有增长率以及其他经济基本因素息息相关。在检验第二种假设时，我们观察到政治权利与产出损失之间存在正相关关系。但是，在相同的假设下，我们还看到民主对产出损失发挥了保护作用。如果我们从R2的角度考虑，那么体制和治理变量对任何模型的贡献都不大。可以得出的结论是，最开放（在贸易和金融领域）和快速发展的国家遭受的损失最大，因为它们与全球经济的其他脆弱部分具有联系。这些国家的政治取向表现出很大的可变性。最小化危机影响的方法不是政治压制，而是对国际经济活动的开放程度较低。这一发现的含义之一是，政治和体制上的变化，以及国际货币基金组织的参与，都不可能使危机造成的产出损失最小化。首先复苏的发展中国家将是那些已经实现高速增长，财政开放且人均国内生产总值高于同等国家的发展中国家。但是，在长期分析中，例如在经济衰退后的5或10年内，政治和体制变量可能变得更加重要。因此，研究结果不应被认为表明政治和体制变量与发展中国家的长期经济复苏无关。

著录项

  • 作者

    Campbell, Kaycea.;

  • 作者单位

    The Claremont Graduate University.;

  • 授予单位 The Claremont Graduate University.;
  • 学科 Economics General.;Business Administration Management.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2014
  • 页码 195 p.
  • 总页数 195
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号