Thresholds in the process of international financial integration

The financial crisis has re-ignited the fierce debate about the merits of financial globalization and its implications for growth, especially for developing countries. The empirical literature has not been able to conclusively establish the presumed growth benefits of financial integration. Indeed, a new literature proposes that the indirect benefits of financial integration may be more important than the traditional financing channel emphasized in previous analyses. A major complication, however, is that there seem to be certain"threshold"levels of financial and institutional development that an economy needs to attain before it can derive the indirect benefits and reduce the risks of financial openness. This paper develops a unified empirical framework for characterizing such threshold conditions. The analysis finds that there are clearly identifiable thresholds in variables such as financial depth and institutional quality -- the cost-benefit trade-off from financial openness improves significantly once these threshold conditions are satisfied. The findings also show that the thresholds are lower for foreign direct investment and portfolio equity liabilities compared with those for debt liabilities.Debt Markets,Economic Theory&Research,Currencies and Exchange Rates,Emerging Markets,Achieving Shared Growth

Financial Globalization, Growth and Volatility in Developing Countries

This paper provides a comprehensive assessment of empirical evidence about the impact of financial globalization on growth and volatility in developing countries. The results suggest that it is difficult to establish a robust causal relationship between financial integration and economic growth. Furthermore, there is little evidence that developing countries have been consistently successful in using financial integration to stabilize fluctuations in consumption growth. However, we do find that financial globalization can be beneficial under the right circumstances. Empirically, good institutions and quality of governance are crucial in helping developing countries derive the benefits of globalization. Similarly, macroeconomic stability appears to be an important prerequisite for ensuring that financial globalization is beneficial for developing countries. Finally, countries that employ relatively flexible exchange rate regimes and succeed in maintaining fiscal discipline are more likely to enjoy the potential growth and stabilization benefits of financial globalization.

Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty, the Investment Policy of Levered Firms and Corporate Debt Yields

This paper attempts to link the agency literature (concerned with the fact that tensions between bondholders and shareholders may trigger suboptimal investment decisions) with the one dealing with temporal resolution of uncertainty (TRU). We consider here how the speed of resolution of the uncertainty characterizing the firm’s operations affects the risk-shifting behavior of a shareholder-aligned manager. It is assumed that investors are risk neutral and that the return on the risky technology is normally distributed. It is shown that the speed of TRU affects monotonically the extent of risk shifting as well as bond yields, even after optimal contracts mitigating deviations from the first-best investment policy have been written. In particular, the optimal investment-restricting covenant is endogenously characterized. Empirical implications are derived and discussed

Financial Globalization: A Reappraisal

The literature on the benefits and costs of financial globalization for developing countries has exploded in recent years, but along many disparate channels with a variety of apparently conflicting results. We attempt to provide a unified conceptual framework for organizing this vast and growing literature. This framework allows us to provide a fresh synthetic perspective on the macroeconomic effects of financial globalization, both in terms of growth and volatility. Overall, our critical reading of the recent empirical literature is that it lends some qualified support to the view that developing countries can benefit from financial globalization, but with many nuances. On the other hand, there is little systematic evidence to support widely-cited claims that financial globalization by itself leads to deeper and more costly developing country growth crises.

Growth and Volatility in an Era of Globalization

We extend the analysis in Kose, Prasad, and Terrones (2005) to provide a comprehensive examination of the cross-sectional relationship between growth and macroeconomic volatility over the past four decades. We also document that while there has generally been a negative relationship between volatility and growth during this period, the nature of this relationship has been changing over time and across different country groups. In particular, we detect major shifts in this relationship after trade and financial liberalizations. In addition, our results show that volatility stemming from the main components of domestic demand is negatively associated with economic growth. Copyright 2005, International Monetary Fund

How does financial globalization affect risk sharing? Patterns and channels

In theory, one of the main benefits of financial globalization is that it should allow for more efficient international risk sharing. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive empirical evaluation of the patterns of risk sharing among different groups of countries and examine how international financial integration has affected the evolution of risk sharing patterns. Using a variety of empirical techniques, we conclude that there is at best a modest degree of international risk sharing, and certainly nowhere near the levels predicted by theory. In addition, only industrial countries have attained better risk sharing outcomes during the recent period of globalization. Developing countries have, by and large, been shut out of this benefit. The most interesting result is that even emerging market economies, which have witnessed large increases in cross-border capital flows, have seen little change in their ability to share risk. We find that the composition of flows may help explain why emerging markets have not been able to realize this presumed benefit of financial globalization. In particular, our results suggest that portfolio debt, which has dominated the external liability stocks of most emerging markets until recently, is not conducive to risk sharing

How do trade and financial integration affect the relationship between growth and volatility?

The influential work of Ramey and Ramey (1995) highlighted an empirical relationship that has now come to be regarded as conventional wisdom that output volatility and growth are negatively correlated. We reexamine this relationship in the context of globalization a term typically used to describe the phenomenon of growing international trade and financial integration that has intensified since the mid-1980s. Using a comprehensive new dataset, we document that, while the basic negative association between growth and volatility has been preserved during the 1990s, both trade and financial integration significantly weaken this negative relationship. Specifically, we find that the estimated coefficient on the interaction between volatility and trade integration is significantly positive. We find a similar, although less significant, result for the interaction of financial integration with volatility

Business cycles, international trade and capital flows: Evidence from Latin America

This paper adopts a flexible framework to assess both short- and long-run business cycle linkages between six Latin American (LA) countries and the four largest economies in the world (namely the US, the Euro area, Japan and China) over the period 1980:I-2011:IV. The result indicate that within the LA region there are considerable differences between countries, success stories coexisting with extremely vulnerable economies. They also show that the LA region as a whole is largely dependent on external developments, especially in the years after the great recession of 2008 and 2009. The trade channel appears to be the most important source of business cycle comovement, whilst capital flows are found to have a limited role, especially in the very short run