Dutch disease, factor mobility costs, and the ‘Alberta Effect’ – The case of Federations

Do reduced costs of factor mobility mitigate ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms, to the extent that they are reversed? The case of federations provides an indication they do. By investigating 'Resource Curse' effects in all federations with available state-level data, it is observed that within federations resource abundance is a blessing, while between federations it is a curse, similar to results observed in previous cross-country studies. A theory is then presented in an attempt to explain the opposite results of the intra and cross federal (and previous cross-country) analyses. It is argued that the reduced costs of factor mobility within federations trigger an ‘Alberta Effect’ –where resource abundant regions exploit the fiscal advantage, provided by resource rents, to compete more aggressively in the inter-regional competition over capital, and as a result attract vast amounts of capital– which in turn mitigates, and even reverses, ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms, so that ‘Resource Curse’ effects do not apply. Thus, this paper emphasizes the significance of the mitigating role of factor mobility in 'Dutch Disease' theory, and presents a novel mechanism (the ‘Alberta Effect’) through which this mitigation, and possible reversion, process occurs. The paper concludes with empirical evidence for the main implications of the model, taking the United States as a case study.Natural Resources, Factor Mobility, Dutch Disease, Resource Curse, Tax Competition, Economic Growth

Dutch Disease, Factor Mobility Costs, and the ‘Alberta Effect’ – The Case of Federations

Do reduced costs of factor mobility mitigate ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms? The case of federations provides an indication for this. By investigating ‘Resource Curse’ effects in all federations for which complete data is available at the regional level it is observed that within federations resource abundance is more of a blessing than a curse (while between them the curse remains). In addition, it is also shown that federations with relatively worse institutional quality experience amplified reversed ‘Resource Curse’ effects within them, so that results are not driven by good institutions. A theory is then presented in an attempt to explain the difference between the cross-federal (and previous cross-country) results of the ‘Resource Curse’, and the intra-federal ones presented initially. It is argued that the reduced factor mobility costs within federations (compared to the costs of cross-country mobility) trigger an ‘Alberta Effect’ which mitigates ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms, so that ‘Resource Curse’ effects do not apply within federations, and are even reversed. Thus, this paper demonstrates and emphasizes the significance of the mitigating role of factor mobility; also, it highlights the relative importance of ‘Dutch Disease’ theory (compared to the ‘institutions’ perspective) in explaining the ‘Resource Curse’ phenomenon. The paper concludes with empirical evidence for the main implications of the model, taking the United States and Canada as case studies.Natural Resources, Economic Growth, Factor Mobility, Dutch Disease, Resource Curse, Tax Competition, Spatial Economics

The Natural Resource Curse, Fiscal Decentralization, and Agglomeration Economies

Natural resource abundance is a blessing for some countries, yet is a curse for others. The degree of fiscal decentralization may account for this divergent outcome. Resources tend to locate in remote, non-agglomerated, and sparsely populated areas; a high degree of fiscal decentralization gives a resource abundant region an advantage in the inter-regional tax competition over capital so that it attracts some capital from agglomerated and densely populated regions. Given a sufficiently high agglomeration level, any such movement of capital would bring a loss of output in the agglomerated region that outweighs the sum of gains from resource income and increased output in the remote region – so that aggregate product in the economy drops. This theory is empirically tested -and confirmed- building on Sachs and Warner’s influential works on the resource curse, employing the World Bank’s Fiscal Decentralization Indicators, and taking the United States as a case study.Natural Resources, Economic Growth, Resource Curse, Fiscal Decentralization, Agglomeration Economies, Tax Competition

The natural resource curse and fiscal decentralization

© 2015 The Author. Natural resource abundance is a blessing for some countries, but a curse for others. We show that differences across countries in the degree of fiscal decentralization can contribute to this divergent outcome. Using a large panel of countries covering several decades and various fiscal decentralization and natural resource measures, we provide empirical support for the novel hypothesis. We also study a model that combines political and market mechanisms under a unified framework to illustrate how natural resource booms may create negative effects in fiscally decentralized nations

Dutch disease, factor mobility costs, and the ‘Alberta Effect’ – The case of Federations

Do reduced costs of factor mobility mitigate ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms, to the extent that they are reversed? The case of federations provides an indication they do. By investigating 'Resource Curse' effects in all federations with available state-level data, it is observed that within federations resource abundance is a blessing, while between federations it is a curse, similar to results observed in previous cross-country studies. A theory is then presented in an attempt to explain the opposite results of the intra and cross federal (and previous cross-country) analyses. It is argued that the reduced costs of factor mobility within federations trigger an ‘Alberta Effect’ –where resource abundant regions exploit the fiscal advantage, provided by resource rents, to compete more aggressively in the inter-regional competition over capital, and as a result attract vast amounts of capital– which in turn mitigates, and even reverses, ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms, so that ‘Resource Curse’ effects do not apply. Thus, this paper emphasizes the significance of the mitigating role of factor mobility in 'Dutch Disease' theory, and presents a novel mechanism (the ‘Alberta Effect’) through which this mitigation, and possible reversion, process occurs. The paper concludes with empirical evidence for the main implications of the model, taking the United States as a case study

Dutch Disease, Factor Mobility Costs, and the ‘Alberta Effect’ – The Case of Federations

Do reduced costs of factor mobility mitigate ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms? The case of federations provides an indication for this. By investigating ‘Resource Curse’ effects in all federations for which complete data is available at the regional level it is observed that within federations resource abundance is more of a blessing than a curse (while between them the curse remains). In addition, it is also shown that federations with relatively worse institutional quality experience amplified reversed ‘Resource Curse’ effects within them, so that results are not driven by good institutions. A theory is then presented in an attempt to explain the difference between the cross-federal (and previous cross-country) results of the ‘Resource Curse’, and the intra-federal ones presented initially. It is argued that the reduced factor mobility costs within federations (compared to the costs of cross-country mobility) trigger an ‘Alberta Effect’ which mitigates ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms, so that ‘Resource Curse’ effects do not apply within federations, and are even reversed. Thus, this paper demonstrates and emphasizes the significance of the mitigating role of factor mobility; also, it highlights the relative importance of ‘Dutch Disease’ theory (compared to the ‘institutions’ perspective) in explaining the ‘Resource Curse’ phenomenon. The paper concludes with empirical evidence for the main implications of the model, taking the United States and Canada as case studies

The Natural Resource Curse, Fiscal Decentralization, and Agglomeration Economies

Natural resource abundance is a blessing for some countries, yet is a curse for others. The degree of fiscal decentralization may account for this divergent outcome. Resources tend to locate in remote, non-agglomerated, and sparsely populated areas; a high degree of fiscal decentralization gives a resource abundant region an advantage in the inter-regional tax competition over capital so that it attracts some capital from agglomerated and densely populated regions. Given a sufficiently high agglomeration level, any such movement of capital would bring a loss of output in the agglomerated region that outweighs the sum of gains from resource income and increased output in the remote region – so that aggregate product in the economy drops. This theory is empirically tested -and confirmed- building on Sachs and Warner’s influential works on the resource curse, employing the World Bank’s Fiscal Decentralization Indicators, and taking the United States as a case study

Dutch Disease, Factor Mobility Costs, and the ‘Alberta Effect’ – The Case of Federations

Do reduced costs of factor mobility mitigate ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms? The case of federations provides an indication for this. By investigating ‘Resource Curse’ effects in all federations for which complete data is available at the regional level it is observed that within federations resource abundance is more of a blessing than a curse (while between them the curse remains). In addition, it is also shown that federations with relatively worse institutional quality experience amplified reversed ‘Resource Curse’ effects within them, so that results are not driven by good institutions. A theory is then presented in an attempt to explain the difference between the cross-federal (and previous cross-country) results of the ‘Resource Curse’, and the intra-federal ones presented initially. It is argued that the reduced factor mobility costs within federations (compared to the costs of cross-country mobility) trigger an ‘Alberta Effect’ which mitigates ‘Dutch Disease’ symptoms, so that ‘Resource Curse’ effects do not apply within federations, and are even reversed. Thus, this paper demonstrates and emphasizes the significance of the mitigating role of factor mobility; also, it highlights the relative importance of ‘Dutch Disease’ theory (compared to the ‘institutions’ perspective) in explaining the ‘Resource Curse’ phenomenon. The paper concludes with empirical evidence for the main implications of the model, taking the United States and Canada as case studies

Input-trade Liberalization and the Demand for Managers:Evidence from India

Can input-trade liberalization increase the demand for managers? Imported inputs are an important source of technology ináows. Previous research on the implications of imported inputs overlooked their potential e§ect on the demand for managing the new incoming knowledge. Adopting the case of India, this paper presents a Örst empirical attempt to Öll this gap. Using detailed Örm-level data that uniquely distinguishes between the compensations of managers and non-managers, and exploiting the exogenous nature of Indiaís Eight-Plan trade reform, we investigate the potential causal link between input-trade liberalization and the demand for managers relative to non-managers. We Önd that a decrease in input tari§s increases the relative demand for managers, primarily in domestic Örms that use the imported inputs to produce intermediate goods. SpeciÖcally, a 10% drop in input tari§s induces, on average, a 1-1.5% increase in the compensation share of managers, manifested via increases in both their number as well as average wages and bonuses. These patterns are: (i) observed across the Örmsí size distribution; (ii) applicable for both exporting and non-exporting Örms; (iii) stronger in familyrun Örms that operate under áexible labor market regulations; (iv) relatively more dominant in the short-run. In addition, we show that unlike changes in input tari§s, import competition does not a§ect the relative demand for managers