Management Matters

Journal of Monetary Economics (Impact Factor: 1.89). 01/2010; 59(tecipa-406). DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoneco.2012.03.002
Source: RePEc

ABSTRACT This paper calculates indices of central bank autonomy (CBA) for 163 central banks as of end-2003, and comparable indices for a subgroup of 68 central banks as of the end of the 1980s. The results confirm strong improvements in both economic and political CBA over the past couple of decades, although more progress is needed to boost political autonomy of the central banks in emerging market and developing countries. Our analysis confirms that greater CBA has on average helped to maintain low inflation levels. The paper identifies four broad principles of CBA that have been shared by the majority of countries. Significant differences exist in the area of banking supervision where many central banks have retained a key role. Finally, we discuss the sequencing of reforms to separate the conduct of monetary and fiscal policies. IMF Staff Papers (2009) 56, 263–296. doi:10.1057/imfsp.2008.25; published online 23 September 2008

Download full-text


Available from: Michelle Alexopoulos, Aug 20, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract There is policy interest in factoring productivity growth into technical progress and returns to scale components. Our approach uses exact index number methods to reduce the parameters that must be estimated, and allows us to exploit the cross-sectional dimension of plant-level panel data. We show that the same equation can also be used to estimate ‘Harberger’ scale economies and technical progress indicators that require fewer assumptions. Estimates of the elasticity of scale for Japanese establishments in three major industries over 1964–88 are presented. Our study spans the high growth era of the 1960s, two oil shocks, and other exogenous shocks. Il y a intérêt en politique publique à identifier les composantes de la croissance de la productivité attribuables au progrès technique et aux rendements à l’échelle. L’approche utilise les méthodes des nombres indices exacts pour réduire les paramètres qui doivent êtres estimés, et pouvoir exploiter la dimension transversale des données de panel au niveau de l’établissement. On montre que la même équation peut être utilisée pour estimer les indicateurs d’économies d’échelle et de progrès technique à la Harberger (lesquels nécessitent un plus petit nombre de postulats). On présente des évaluations de l’élasticité d’échelle pour des établissements japonais dans trois industries importantes entre 1964 et 1988.L’étude couvre la période de forte croissance des années 1960, celle des deux chocs pétroliers et d’autres chocs exogènes.
    Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne d`Economique 05/2010; 44(2):451-485. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-5982.2011.01640.x · 0.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We provide evidence that positive industry-level productivity shocks cause hours worked to fall in the short run in the UK economy. We use UK industry data, which covers both manufacturing and non-manufacturing industries, and identify productivity shocks using long-run restrictions and structural vector autoregression methodology. Our findings show that the unconditional correlation between growth rates of productivity and hours is negative in almost all the industries, and the correlation conditional on productivity shocks is negative in over three-quarters of the industries. After a positive productivity shock, hours fall in 26 of the 31 industries. The findings at the aggregate level are consistent with those at industry level. We note some striking differences in comparison to the recent US literature. Significantly larger capital adjustment costs in the UK help account for the UK-US differences. Moreover, UK industries with higher investment elasticities (lower capital adjustment costs) have less negative impact effects of hours.
    The B E Journal of Macroeconomics 01/2013; 13(1). DOI:10.1515/bejm-2012-0056 · 0.32 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Over the last decade the World Management Survey (WMS) has collected firm-level management practices data across multiple sectors and countries. We developed the survey to try to explain the large and persistent total factor productivity (TFP) differences across firms and countries. This review paper discusses what has been learned empirically and theoretically from the WMS and other recent work on management practices. Our preliminary results suggest that about a quarter of cross-country and within-country TFP gaps can be accounted for by management practices. Management seems to matter both qualitatively and quantitatively for performance at the level of the firm and the nation. Competition, governance, human capital, and informational frictions help account for the variation in management. We make some suggestions for both policy and future research.
    Journal of the European Economic Association 08/2014; 12(4). DOI:10.1111/jeea.12094 · 1.36 Impact Factor