Article

Basic Needs, Government Debt and Economic Growth

World Economy (Impact Factor: 0.69). 06/2009; 32(6):965-994. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9701.2009.01181.x
Source: RePEc

ABSTRACT This paper investigates the relationships between basic needs and economic growth where the interactions between output, health, nutrition and education are explicitly simultaneous. We find a unidirectional relationship that improving basic welfare contributes strongly to labour productivity change, but a clear reverse causation only from growth to nutrition. There are substantial differences in the patterns of simultaneous interactions at different income and welfare levels. There are strong self-reinforcing effects of literacy and debt service on poverty, making it difficult for poor countries to rectify their situation. Channelling resources towards improving health, education and nutrition could bring dramatic economic returns. Copyright 2009 The Authors. Journal compilation 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
188 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper investigates the relationship between economic growth and government debt for one of the biggest economies in the world, the economy of China. The data were fitted into a regression equation using econometric techniques such as unit root tests and Granger causality. Regarding unit root tests we are using three kind of tests: i) The conventional unit tests, which do not take into account structural breaks, ii) the unit root tests that take into account one structural break and iii) tests that take into account multiple structural breaks. The analysis is based on data over the period 1984 to 2011 for China. The results reveal that there are structural breaks in the economy of China but no Granger causality between the variables.
    Romanian journal of economic forecasting 12/2012; XV(46):229-248. DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2340385 · 0.25 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper investigates the nexus between economic growth and defense spending for three adjacent countries, namely Greece, Turkey and Cyprus. Greece and Cyprus, members-countries of European Union spend much more money than other member countries of EU relatively to their GDP. Turkey is in accession negotiations with EU and is among the top 15 countries with the highest military expenditure. These three countries are particularly interesting case studies because of their high military burdens and the bad relations between them (Greece and Cyprus opposite Turkey). The empirical analysis is based on panel data analysis of data over the period 1960 – 2006.
    SSRN Electronic Journal 01/2012; 15(44):163-182. DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2340398
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article gives an insider's view of the origin of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the aim of which was two-fold: to rescue the Millennium Declaration from oblivion and to expand the development narrative beyond economic growth. The former has been successful, but not the latter. Since its establishment, the MDG agenda has been permeated with the idolatry of literalism and sanitized to fit the conventional development paradigm. Statistics have been abused to fabricate evidence of success. The great paradox is that poverty is increasingly regarded as a multi-dimensional phenomenon whilst its quantification remains essentially one-dimensional, which reinforces a money-metric perspective of the MDGs. The agenda has been cut back to a standard set of macroeconomic, sectoral or institutional reforms of a technical nature. However, the MDG agenda implies fundamental transformations in society, which are invariably driven by domestic politics and local actors. The world is off track, not because of insufficient economic growth but mostly because people in the bottom quintiles have benefited disproportionately little from national progress. As long as the world continues to turn a blind eye to the growing inequities within countries, the MDGs will be mission impossible. For the remaining period, their meaning is best described as ‘Minding Development Gaps’.
    Development and Change 01/2011; 42(1):1 - 21. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-7660.2010.01678.x · 1.41 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Download
101 Downloads
Available from
May 31, 2014