Intellectual Property Rights as Development Determinants

Intellectual property rights (IPRs) have been identified as key drivers of economic performance in R&D based growth models, but their impact on development has not been fully explored in development accounting exercises. We introduce IPRs to the development accounting literature, using Two-Stage Least Squares Bayesian Model Averaging (2SBMA) to address endogeneity and model uncertainty at the instrument and income stages. We show that IPRs exert similar effects as “Rule of Law,” which has long been heralded as a core development determinant in cross country regressions. Our results thus provide robust evidence that both dimensions of property rights, physical and intellectual, are crucial prerequisites to economic development. Most importantly, we document that IPRs those that are simply written into law, but are unenforced, exert no effect on development. Instead, it is the level of enforced IPRs that causes development.

In Search of WTO Trade Effects: Preferential Trade Agreements Promote Trade Strongly, But Unevenly

The literature measuring the impact of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTA) and WTO membership on trade flows has produced remarkably diverse results. Rose’s (2004) seminal paper reports a range of specifications that show no WTO effects, but Subramanian and Wei (2007) contend that he does not fully control for multilateral resistance (which could bias WTO estimates). Subramanian and Wei (2007) address multilateral resistance comprehensively to report strong WTO trade effects for industrialized countries but do not account for unobserved bilateral heterogeneity (which could inflate WTO estimates). We unify these two approaches by accounting for both multilateral resistance and unobserved bilateral heterogeneity, while also allowing for individual trade effects of PTAs. WTO effects vanish and remain robustly insignificant once multilateral resistance, unobserved bilateral heterogeneity, and individual PTA effects are introduced. The result is robust to the use of alternative definitions and coding conventions for WTO membership that have been employed by Rose (2004), Tomz et al. (2007), or by Subramanian and Wei’s (2007).

Germany’s Continued Productivity Slump: An Industry Analysis

US productivity growth surged twice post 1995 and post 2000. In contrast Germany registered two successive productivity reductions during that same period of time. Previous analysis of the post-2000 decline has been limited, however, by the short time series of the available data. In this paper we extend the Ifo Industry Growth Accounting Database that provides detailed industry-level investment information up to 2004. While much attention has focused on the reduction in German labor hours, our post-2000 data shows that a fledgling recovery in German non-ICT investment was offset by a widespread collapse in German total factor productivity. Almost half of German industries (accounting for over 45 percent of German output) did not experience positive TFP growth post 2000. Industries that constitute over a quarter of Germany’s value-added exhibited negative labor productivity growth during the same period. The negative German productivity trend is thus continuing, which accelerates the country’s departure from the productivity frontier.Growth accounting, industry productivity analysis, information and communication technology

Robust FDI Determinants: Bayesian Model Averaging In The Presence Of Selection Bias

The literature on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) determinants is remarkably diverse in terms of competing theories and empirical results. We utilize Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA) to resolve the model uncertainty that surrounds the validity of the competing FDI theories. Since the structure of existing FDI data is known to induce selection bias, we extend BMA theory to HeckitBMA to address model uncertainty in the presence of selection bias. We then show that more than half of the previously suggested FDI determinants are no longer robust and highlight theories that receive support from the data. In addition, our selection approach allows us to highlight that the determinants of margins of FDI (intensive and extensive) differ profoundly in the data, while FDI theories do not usually model this aspect explicitly.