According to the consensus view in growth and development economics, cross country differences in per-capita income largely reflect differences in countries' total factor productivity. We argue that this view has powerful implications for patterns of capital flows: everything else equal, countries with faster productivity growth should invest more, and attract more foreign capital. We then show that the pattern of net capital flows across developing countries is not consistent with this prediction. If anything, capital seems to flow more to countries that invest and grow less. We argue that this result-which we call the allocation puzzle-constitutes an important challenge for economic research, and discuss some possible research avenues to solve the puzzle.

Standard theoretical arguments tell us that countries with relatively little capital benefit from financial integration as foreign capital flows in and speeds up the process of convergence. We show in a calibrated neoclassical model that conventionally measured welfare gains from this type of convergence appear relatively limited for the typical emerging country. The welfare gain from switching from financial autarky to perfect capital mobility is roughly equivalent to a one percent permanent increase in domestic consumption for the typical emerging economy. This is negligible relative to the potential welfare gain of a take-off in domestic productivity of the magnitude observed in some of these countries.

No abstract