Prostorová ekonomie a prostorové externality : pøehled teorie a empirické evidence

The spatial and economics has not given careful attention to space. This article surveys recent contributions on the spatial or regional economics, which often overlaps with urban economics. As this literature is very heterogeneous, we use the concept of spatial externalities as the common criterion for the basic classification of the studies. The pecuniary externalities, which are by-product of the market transactions, became the cornerstone of the New Economic Geography (NEG) introduced by Krugman. NEG is presently the dominant theory in the economics of space as it builds on robust microeconomic foundations. Yet its empirical verification is at the very beginning. On the contrary the technological externalities are believed to arise rather spontaneously because of the physical proximity rather then intentional economic transactions. The existing research on these externalities is predominately empiric. Meanwhile the human capital externalities are example of static technological externalities; the related externalities of labour pooling are of pecuniary nature. Finally, the knowledge externalities or spillovers are pure technological externalities. There are three main strands of literature that employ this concept: studies on local economic growth, empirical studies on the localized knowledge spillovers (part of it known as spatial econometrics) and Italian New Industrial Geography. Many of the studies give important insight on the formation of economic space but all lacks generality. For this reason it would be vital in the future to extent the studies that they could deal with different kinds of spatial externalities and directly compare their individual importance in territory

Early Warning Indicators of Crisis Incidence: Evidence from a Panel of 40 Developed Countries

We provide a critical review of the literature on early warning indicators of economics crises and propose methods to overcome several pitfalls of the previous contributions. We use a quarterly panel of 40 EU and OECD countries for the period 1970–2010. As the response variable, we construct a continuous index of crisis incidence capturing the real costs for the economy. As the potential warning indicators, we evaluate a wide range of variables, selected according to the previous literature and our own considerations. For each potential indicator we determine the optimal lead employing panel vector autoregression, then we select useful indicators employing Bayesian model averaging. We re-estimate the resulting specification by system GMM to account for potential endogeneity of some indicators. Subsequently, to allow for country heterogeneity, we evaluate the random coefficients estimator and illustrate the stability among endogenous clusters. Our results suggest that global variables rank among the most useful early warning indicators. In addition, housing prices emerge consistently as an important domestic source of risk.Early warning indicators, Bayesian model averaging, panel VAR, dynamic panel, macro-prudential policies.