2017
DOI: 10.1007/s40888-017-0063-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Institutions and policies of economic freedom: different effects on income and growth

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Finally, we were unable to estimate quantitative superiority of institutions over culture in terms of marginal effects (at least not in the definition adopted from Olson) but the proxy variables for them were statistically more significant. The results are robust and, although we could not prove the full validity of Olson's conjecture econometrically (that culture and institutions are the factors explaining differences in wealth across countries), we believe its philosophy and logic to be valid, which is in accord with several previous studies on the topic, such as Tabellini (2008;2010), Williamson (2009), Law et al (2013) or Kapas and Czegledi (2017). In the light of these findings future research should probably focus on the quality of proxies for non-economic factors and on (multi)collinearity in hybrid models such as (2) and (3) in this paper.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 62%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Finally, we were unable to estimate quantitative superiority of institutions over culture in terms of marginal effects (at least not in the definition adopted from Olson) but the proxy variables for them were statistically more significant. The results are robust and, although we could not prove the full validity of Olson's conjecture econometrically (that culture and institutions are the factors explaining differences in wealth across countries), we believe its philosophy and logic to be valid, which is in accord with several previous studies on the topic, such as Tabellini (2008;2010), Williamson (2009), Law et al (2013) or Kapas and Czegledi (2017). In the light of these findings future research should probably focus on the quality of proxies for non-economic factors and on (multi)collinearity in hybrid models such as (2) and (3) in this paper.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 62%
“…His conclusion was predominantly backed by several subsequent empirical studies on differences across (macro) regions and on sources of productivity growth; consult Lall et al (2002). These studies discovered a positive correlation between productivity growth and civic, economic and political liberty in 30 countries in the Western hemisphere in 1978-1994 (Tabellini, 2008;Tabellini, 2010;Williamson, 2009;Law et al, 2013;Kapas and Czegledi, 2017), measuring a bidirectional causality between institutions and economic development in data from 60 countries. Institutions and policies were found to be of "primary importance" for economic development in the long run based on a cross-country regression analysis.…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Using panel data, it is possible to capture non-observable heterogeneity, such as cross-section analysis and time series analysis (Wooldridge, 2010;Saucedo-Acosta, Molina & Diaz, 2016). Some authors analyse the effect of institutions on economic growth (Kapas & Czegledi, 2017;Hall, et al, 2010;Dias & Tebaldi, 2012;Kim et al, 2012) and others the impact of knowledge, human capital, investment in R&D activities and high-technology exports on innovation and economic growth (Aditya & Acharyya, 2013;Coe et al, 2009;Fu et al, 2011;Marroquin & Rios, 2012; (Borges, Saucedo-Acosta & Diaz, 2017 ig: is a variable that measures how the institutions work together. It was estimated by Borges, Saucedo-Acosta & Diaz (2017).…”
Section: Econometric Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%