Knowledge that Transforms

Africa has had slow growth and a massive exodus of capital. In many respects it has been the most capital-hostile region. We review and interpret the aggregate-level and microeconomic literatures to identify the key explanations for this performance. There is a reasonable correspondence of the two sets of evidence, pointing to four factors as being important. These are a lack of openness to international trade; a high-risk environment; a low level of social capital; and poor infrastructure. These problems are to a substantial extent attributable to government behavior, and the paper includes a review of the political economy literature addressing that behavior.

Investors hold a substantially larger proportion of their wealth portfolios in domestic assets than standard portfolio theory would suggest, a phenomenon called “equity home bias.” In the absence of this bias, investors would optimally diversify domestic output risk using foreign equities. Therefore, consumption growth rates would tend to co-move across countries even when output growth rates do not. Empirically, however, consumption growth rates tend to have a lower correlation across countries than do output growth rates, a phenomenon I call “consumption home bias.” In this paper, I discuss these two biases and their potential relationship as suggested by the literature.

We analyze the relationship between inequality and economic growth from two directions. The first part of the survey examines the effect of inequality on growth, showing that when capital markets are imperfect, there is not necessarily a trade-off between equity and efficiency. It therefore provides an explanation for two recent empirical findings, namely, the negative impact of inequality and the positive effect of redistribution upon growth. The second part analyzes several mechanisms whereby growth may increase wage inequality, both across and within education cohorts. Technical change, and in particular the implementation of “General Purpose Technologies,” stands as a crucial factor in explaining the recent upsurge in wage inequality.

Why do growth rates differ? This paper surveys the recent empirical literature on economic growth, starting with a discussion of stylized facts, data problems, and statistical methods. Six research questions are emphasized, drawing on growth and convergence research. In answering these questions, the paper argues that efficiency has grown at different rates across countries, casting doubt on neoclassical models in which technology is a public good. The latter half of the paper rounds up a variety of findings before providing answers to all six questions, including a short summary of how differences in growth rates arise.

In the past decade, microfinance programs have demonstrated that it is possible to lend to low-income households while maintaining high repayment rates—even without requiring collateral. The programs promise a revolution in approaches to alleviating poverty and spreading financial services, and millions of poor households are served globally. A growing body of economic theory demonstrates how new contractual forms offer a key to microfinance success—particularly the use of group-lending contracts with joint liability. For the most part, however, high repayment rates have not translated into profits, and studies of impacts on poverty yield a mixed picture. In describing emerging tensions, the paper highlights the diversity of innovative mechanisms beyond group-lending contracts, the measurement of financial sustainability, the estimation of economic and social impacts, the costs and benefits of subsidization, and the potential to reduce poverty through savings programs rather than just credit. The promise of microfinance has pushed far ahead of the evidence, and an agenda is put forward for addressing critical empirical gaps and sharpening the terms of policy discussion.

This paper is a selective survey of fiscal federalism. It begins with a brief review and some reflections on the traditional theory of fiscal federalism: the assignment of functions to levels of government, the welfare gains from fiscal decentralization, and the use of fiscal instruments. It then explores a series of important topics that are the subject of current research: laboratory federalism, interjurisdictional competition and environmental federalism, the political economy of fiscal federalism, market-preserving federalism, and fiscal decentralization in the developing and transitional economies.

This paper provides an overview of the existing theoretical and empirical work on the provision of incentives. It reviews the costs and benefits of many types of pay-for-performance, such as piece rates, promotions, and long-term incentives. The main conclusions are (i) while there is considerable evidence that individuals respond to pay-for-performance, there is less evidence that contracts are designed as predicted by the theory, (ii) there has been little progress made in distinguishing amongst plausible theories, and (iii) we still know little about how incentives are provided to workers whose output is difficult to measure.

The paper reviews the recent literature on monetary policy rules. We exposit the monetary policy design problem within a simple baseline theoretical framework. We then consider the implications of adding various real world complications. Among other things, we show that the optimal policy implicitly incorporates inflation targeting. We also characterize the gains from making a credible commitment to fight inflation. In contrast to conventional wisdom, we show that gains from commitment may emerge even if the central bank is not trying to inadvisedly push output above its natural level. We also consider the implications of frictions such as imperfect information.

May 01 1999 Rejoinder Michael F. Bryan, Michael F. Bryan Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Stephen G. Cecchetti Stephen G. Cecchetti Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Author and Article Information Michael F. Bryan Stephen G. Cecchetti Received: December 16 1998 Accepted: December 18 1998 Online ISSN: 1530-9142 Print ISSN: 0034-6535 © 1999 President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology1999 The Review of Economics and Statistics (1999) 81 (2): 203–204. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465399558175 Article history Received: December 16 1998 Accepted: December 18 1998 Cite Icon Cite Permissions Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Search Site Citation Michael F. Bryan, Stephen G. Cecchetti; Rejoinder. The Review of Economics and Statistics 1999; 81 (2): 203–204. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/003465399558175 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll JournalsThe Review of Economics and Statistics Search Advanced Search This content is only available as a PDF. © 1999 President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology1999 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

This paper examines the mobility of individuals through the wage and earnings distributions, using 1979-1991 data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. Lifetime wages will be more equally distributed than wages from any single year if individuals change position in the wage distribution over time. The results suggest that mobility is predominantly within group mobility, reducing wage inequality by 12%-26% over a four-year horizon. A detailed examination of within-group mobility, using year-to-year estimates of transition probabilities among quintiles of the distribution, reveals similar general patterns across all skill groups: mobility declined significantly over the years, especially at the lower end of the wage and earnings distributions.