No abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. regressors. In contrast to previous studies, we find that FDI has, on average, a negative effect on growth in developing countries, but that there are large cross-country differences in the growth effects of FDI. Second, we use a general-tospecific model selection approach to systematically search for country-specific factors explaining the cross-country differences in the growth effects of FDI. Contrary to previous results, we find that the cross-country differences in per capita income, human capital, openness, and financial market development cannot explain the cross-country differences in the growth effects of FDI. Instead, the growth effects of FDI are positively related to freedom from government intervention and freedom from business regulation, and negatively related to FDI volatility and natural resource dependence. Terms of use: Documents inJEL-Classification: F21; F43; C23; C21

It is frequently suggested that export diversification contributes to an acceleration of growth in developing countries. Horizontal export diversification into completely new export sectors may generate positive externalities on the rest of the economy as export oriented sectors gain from dynamic learning activities due to contacts with foreign purchasers and exposure to international competition. Vertical diversification out of primary into manufactured exports is also associated with growth since primary export sectors generally do not exhibit strong spillovers. Yet there have been remarkably few empirical investigations into the link between export diversification and growth. This paper attempts to examine the hypothesis that export diversification is linked to economic growth via externalities of learning-by-doing and learning-by-exporting fostered by competition in world markets. The diversification-led growth hypothesis is tested by estimating an augmented Cobb-Douglas production function on the basis of annual time series data from Chile. Based on the theory of cointegration three types of statistical methodologies are used: the Johansen trace test, a multivariate error-correction model and the dynamic OLS procedure. Given structural changes in the Chilean economy, time series techniques considering structural breaks are applied. The estimation results suggest that export diversification plays an important role in economic growth.

We examine the long-run relationship between fertility, mortality, and income using panel cointegration techniques and the available data for the last century. Our main result is that mortality changes and growth of income contributed to the fertility transition. The fertility reduction triggered by falling mortality, however, is not enough to overcompensate the positive effect of falling mortality on population growth. This means that growth of income per capita is essential to explain the observed secular decline of population growth. These results are robust to alternative estimation methods, potential outliers, sample selection, different measures of mortality, the sample period, the inclusion of education as an explanatory variable, and the use of different data sets. In addition, our causality tests suggest that fertility changes are both cause and consequence of economic development.

This paper uses heterogeneous panel cointegration techniques to estimate the long-run effect of income inequality on per-capita income for 46 countries over the period 1970-1995. We find that inequality has a negative long-run effect on income, both for the sample as a whole and for important sub-groups within the sample (developed countries, developing countries, democracies, and non-democracies). The effect is economically important, with a magnitude about half as high as the magnitude of an increase in the investment share.