No abstract

The events that occurred after the worldwide diffusion of COVID‐19 provide a real‐life example of how uncertainty can severely affect the global economy. This paper reviews literature on the negative impacts of the economic policy uncertainty index (EPU) as developed by Baker et al., The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2016, 131, 1593–1636 on individuals, businesses, governments, and economies at the local and international levels. This reveals that a high EPU is associated with adverse effects on households, corporations, and governments, which tend to delay many financial decisions under high uncertainty, which leads to lower consumption, fewer issuances of debt, fewer investments, and higher unemployment. The effects of political and regulatory uncertainty also extend to the commodity markets, such as the adverse effects on both oil and gasoline markets, and can potentially create adverse impacts on the crypto‐currency market and its potential growth. We demonstrate that governmental uncertainty also affects financial, housing, and equity markets; debt issuances; and the entire economy. This underscores the importance of considering EPU as a risk factor. The association with several components of the global economy reflects not only the EPU index's critical influence, but also the importance of risk management. Our results lead us to consider the gravity of economic policy uncertainty and call for innovation across different sectors to mitigate its adverse effects.

The Natural Resource Curse literature started with a clear consensus that dependence on natural resources have clear direct negative effects on economic growth and levels of democracy. However, the literature today reflects that the debate is still going where several papers reflects evidence that is against the consensus of the Natural Resource Curse hypothesis, which provides many open avenues for further research. This paper surveys the literature of the natural resource curse and identifies the main arguments and findings of both streams (curse stream and blessing stream). The main point that this paper highlights is that the literature is still not clear 100% whether the natural resource is a curse or a blessing. The econometric technique and the way how you define natural resources could lead to different or opposite results.

Many studies have found a negative relationship between oil abundance and democracy. However, recent studies have tried to upend this correlation by employing time-series techniques or finding a conditionality on other factors. This study contributes to the literature by employing an Arellano Bond model that corrects for fixed effects and adopts new variables from recent empirical studies. Comparing Eurasia and Latin America from the 1960s to 2010, we find that the theory of a negative relationship between an abundance of natural resources and democracy remains valid.

No abstract