The issues of international stock markets linkages had been investigated over the time. Since the Asian financial crisis in 1997, many economists are concerned about the relationship between Asian stock markets and others in the world. This paper is conducted to examine the linkages between ASEAN-5+3 namely Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, China, Japan and Korea and US stock markets. The data consists of weekly stock indices data. The total samples are separated into three subperiods. First period is pre-crisis period spanning from January 1990 to June 1997. Second period is during-crisis period spanning from July 1997 to June 1998. Third period is post-crisis period spanning from July 1998 to May 2007. All the indices applied are expressed in local currencies. The empirical analysis begins with testing the stationarity properties of the data. All the countries are found to be stationary at first difference except for Japan for pre-crisis period. Next, cointegration test is employed to test the long-run stationary relationship among the stock markets. The number of significant cointegrating vector is higher during-crisis compare to other periods whereas the same number of cointegrating vector is found before and after crisis. Granger-causality based on VECM showed that Thailand is exogenous whereby Malaysia is the most endogenous at before and during the crisis. After the crisis, US become dominant compare to the other countries. In conclusion, we found that ASEAN-5+3 and US stock markets are interdependence during crisis and post-crisis periods and the impact of US stock market is effective in ASEAN-5+3 stock markets only for pre and during-crisis periods.

This study examines the meaningful relationship between economic growth, and service sector contribution and domestic investment in two major Asian economies, namely India and China. Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) bounds testing procedure is employed to analyze the impact of the selected variables namely (1) contribution by the service sector, (2) (4) domestic investment on economic growth and vice versa. The period of interest is 1960-2005 using annual data. The empirical results demonstrate that for the case of India, there is (1) a unidirectional causality from domestic investment to economic growth and (2) from economic growth to services. As for China, only unidirectional causality from services sector to economic growth is detected, while no meaningful relationship was found between domestic investment and economic growth.