Financial Systems, Economic Growth, and Globalization

Rousseau, Peter L.; Sylla, Richard

doi:10.3386/w8323

Cited by 99 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to account for the activity and growth of government over the period, we include a measure of Central government spending, defined as central government expenditure as a share of GDP. Data are from Rousseau and Sylla (2003). Ideally we would have liked to include both central and local governments since the spending patterns at these two administrative levels may both vary systematically across countries and within countries over time.…”

Section: Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our main measure of trade openness is a standard de facto measure: the sum of exports and imports as a share of GDP. For the pre-1960 period data come from Mitchell (1995Mitchell ( , 1998aMitchell ( , 1998b, Rousseau and Sylla (2003) and López-Córdoba and Meissner (2005) and for the post-1960 period we use data from IFS. Data are generally lacking for wartime years.…”

Section: Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reason for not only using statutory top rates is that these rates have been binding to quite varying degrees on top income across countries as well as within countries over time. 30 New series with actual marginal tax rates paid are avail- 29 Rousseau and Sylla (2003) use this variable in their study of the determinants of economic growth in an historical context. Central government spending to GDP is also the variable that is available in databases such as the Penn World Tables, the World Bank's World Development Indicators, and the IMF:s International Financial Statistics.…”

Section: Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Top marginal tax rate: Margtax2 except for Germany, Japan, Sweden, UK and US where it is calculated for incomes ≈ 5×GDPpc. Mitchell = Mitchell (1995, 1998a, 1998b; OECD = OECDE world tax database; RS = Rousseau and Sylla (2003); RSS = Rydqvist, Spizman and Strebulaev (2007); RW = Roine and Waldenström (2006); RZ = Rajan and Zingales (2003); WDI = World Development Indicators (World Bank). (2009) 1966-1985a ,1990-20028 8 France Piketty (2007) 1915-199818 18 Germany Dell (2009) 1925-1938,1944-199813 13 India Banerjee and Piketty (2009) 1922-199916 0 Ireland Nolan (2009) 1938, 1943, 1965,1973 Bordo et al (2001) and Laeven and Valencia (2008).…”

Section: Findevmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The long-run determinants of inequality: What can we learn from top income data?

Roine

Vlachos

Waldenström

2009

Journal of Public Economics

332

345

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies determinants of income inequality using a newly assembled panel of 16 countries over the entire twentieth century. We focus on three groups of income earners: the rich (P99-100), the upper middle class (P90-99), and the rest of the population (P0-90). The results show that periods of high economic growth disproportionately increases the top percentile income share at the expense of the rest of the top decile. Financial development is also pro-rich and the outbreak of banking crises is associated with reduced income shares of the rich. Trade openness has no clear distributional impact (if anything openness reduces top shares). Government spending, however, is negative for the upper middle class and positive for the nine lowest deciles but does not seem to affect the rich. Finally, tax progressivity reduces top income shares and when accounting for real dynamic effects the impact can be important over time.

show abstract

Section: Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Findevmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The long-run determinants of inequality: What can we learn from top income data?

Roine

Vlachos

Waldenström

2009

Journal of Public Economics

332

345

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 Napoleon's sentence "l'intendence suivra'" could be paraphrased with "la finance suivra''' to characterize the ancillary notion that was traditionally attached to the provision of financial services across jurisdictions. This view reflected the gene ral perception that a successful commercial integration was the first and most relevant policy objective while financial 1 Rousseau and Sylla (2001) find that trade integration in the postwar period was not affected by financial integration; Lane and Milesi-Ferretti (2000) find that still in the 1990s financial openness benefited from the level of trade integration. 2 Countries that deliberately liberalized capital movements more than or before trade are concentrated in Latin America.…”

Section: Financial Integration: How and Whenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial Regulatory Harmonization and the Globalization of Finance

Jordan¹

2002

Policy Research Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In the globalizing economy, national policymakers are often forced to accept the challenge of financial integration. Faced with the potentially destabilizing effects of international financial markets, they have to strengthen financial regulation, importing international best practices and aligning domestic with foreign regulation to avoid destabilizing phenomena of regulatory arbitrage. This paper explores the main features of the ongoing process of worldwide financial regulatory convergence and the role played by the global dissemination of financial standards and codes. It analyzes the reasons behind the generalized acceptance of international best practices and the limits of the standards and codes approach to financial regulatory harmonization. Convergence of financial regulation across jurisdictions has been considered, at times a precondition of market integration, at times a consequence, but always a key feature of financial integration. In the last decades the relationship between financial integration and regulatory harmonization, in its various guises, has changed as a result of the accelerating pace of financial globalization. Not only have capital flows increased enormously, but also the provision of financial services across different jurisdictions has grown as a result of the expansion of financial intermediaries internationally and of the direct supply of financial services to foreign entities, as in the case of foreign listings. It can be argued that the increased provision of financial services and products across national boundaries has already exercised a disciplining effect through stiffer competition. Still, the integration of financial products and services and that of financial regulatory frameworks represent two different aspects of the same process, the globalization of finance. They move together but often at different speeds. JEL classification numbers: G21, G28Although market forces can promote regulatory harmonization, regulatory developments should not be left to market forces alone. Market forces and self-regulatory agencies share well known problems. Coordination failures associated with market-led initiatives can generate negative systemic externalities, attracting capital toward less regulated systems and institutions or generating forms of competition in laxity that may undermine financial stability. In addition, the cost of financia l regulation and supervision may be too high for small countries a potentially critical issue in the development of sound standards in a world where the number of independent jurisdictions has almost trebled since World War II. Overall, welfare considerations related to the presence of systemic externalities and to the high cost of public goods suggest that regulatory harmonization should not be left to market forces alone.From the perspectives of the national policymaker and the analyst of international financial relations t he relevant question then becomes how financial regulatory harmonization should be pursued. How should a specific ...

show abstract

Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in the case of tourism island states: The moderating role of globalization

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the relationship between carbon emissions and international tourism growth through the channels of globalization and real income via testing the Environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) over the periods of 1995 to 2016 for 16 selected tourism island states (TIS) that prioritized tourism as a means of maximizing economic growth. Using the dynamic panel‐based pooled mean group method of autoregressive distributed lag, results confirm globalization‐tourism‐induced EKC hypothesis for TIS. This implies international tourism growth and carbon emissions, through the channels of globalization and real income are in a long‐term equilibrium relationship. International tourism and squared term of real income have an inverse significant effect on carbon emission level, while globalization and real income without squared term exert positive and significant effects on carbon emissions level in the long run. Results of the direction of causality tests show that there is a two‐way causality between globalization and carbon emissions, while result also shows one‐way causality running from international tourism to carbon emissions level in the long‐run in the case of the TIS. Thus, globalization‐tourism‐induced EKC hypothesis is suggested in the case of TIS.

show abstract

Financial Systems, Economic Growth, and Globalization

Cited by 99 publications

References 44 publications

The long-run determinants of inequality: What can we learn from top income data?

The long-run determinants of inequality: What can we learn from top income data?

Financial Regulatory Harmonization and the Globalization of Finance

Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in the case of tourism island states: The moderating role of globalization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About