280 likes | 380 Views
Economic and Political Liberalizations. Francesco Giavazzi and Guido Tabellini. Study economic and political liberalizations. Do they improve govt incentives and economic performance? Eg: what advice should IMF give to Egypt, or Pakistan Is there an optimal sequencing?
E N D
Economic and Political Liberalizations Francesco Giavazzi and Guido Tabellini
Study economic and political liberalizations Do they improve govt incentives and economic performance? Eg: what advice should IMF give to Egypt, or Pakistan Is there an optimal sequencing? Eg: China vs Russia or India What are the interactions?
Effects of economic and political liberalizations? Two separate lines of research, on economic outcomes • Effects of economic liberalizations? Good for growth, investment, trade (Sachs-Werner, Wacziarg-Welch) • Effects of political liberalizations? Disagreement, or no effect This paper: Interactions and feedbacks between economic and political liberalizations Effects on policies, not just economic outcomes Persson (2004): effect of different types of demo on liberalizations and structural policies
Specific questions • Effects of economic and political liberalizations, separately? On economic outcomes On other structural policies On macro policies • Feedback effects, and in which directions? • Complementarities? • Does sequencing matter?
Priors? • No theoretical model • But priors and questions motivated by previous research • Economic liberalizations improve outcomes Is it trade or other economic policy reforms? • No effect of democracy on outcomes Is it due to opposite policy effects? democratization → less corruption, more public goods democratization → more redistribution, more veto players • Feedbacks: causality could go either way • Interactions and Sequencing: no priors • Don’t study heterogeneity among democracies
Data on reform Econ. Liberalization: becoming “open” “Closed” if: (i) average tariff > 40%; or (ii) NTB on > 40% of goods; or (iii) socialist economy; or (iv) black mkt premium >20%; or (v) state monopoly in exports Wacziarg and Welch (2003), Sachs and Werner (1995) Political liberalization: becoming “democracy” Polity2 > 0 Sample: about 150 countries in 1960-2000 Some always open / closed Others liberalize in 1960-2000
Data on performance Economic Outcomes (1960-2000) Growth, investment rate, (trade) Governance (1982-97) GADP, corruption Macroeconomic policy (1960-2000, 1970-2000) Inflation (in logs), budget deficit (% GDP)
Difference in difference estimation (Persson 2004) 2 types of countries: “Controls” & “Treated” Compare before/after reform in “treated”, with “controls” over same period (YT1 - YT0 ) - (YC1 - YC0 ) Exploit both cross-country & time variation More credible identification than pure cross-country comparisons / before-after comparison Identifying assumption: no unobserved variable moving over time in different ways between treated / controls Eg.: technological progress does not affect T / C differently Eg.: What triggers reform does not have independent influence on performance
Estimation yit = ai + bt + Reformit + eit Reform =1 in the “treated” after reform Problems: • Are treated / control similar? On average, yes (controls: always open / closed) Condition also on years*continents as regressors - Definition of treated / controls varies with performance • Reversals ? A few Distinguish between temporary / permanent reforms End of period problems: discard observations if reform at end
Results Effects of liberalizations alone Effects of democracy alone Liberalizations and Democracy (multiple treatments) Feedback effects Complementarities and Sequencing
Summary • Effects of Liberalizations (after 3 years or more) • Better economic outcomes • Better governance • Better macro-policies • Liberalizations preceded by • Worse investment • Worse macro-policies • Effects of Democracy • None on economic outcomes • Better governance (after 3 years or more) • Macro-policies? (changes precede reform) • Identification: are reforms random?
But identification problematic – treated improve in the 1990s relative to controls
Multiple treatments: dem & lib Controls: no reform at all Specification: • Mutually exclusive partition (avoid bias due to heterogeneous treatment effects) Eg. Lib_1t = 1 after Lib in single treatment countries Lib_2t = 1 after Lib in double treatment countries… • Test whether sequencing matters • Allow for a few other sources of heterogeneity in treatment effects
1. Lib. improves economic outcomes 2. Demo after Lib gives a further boost
1. Lib improves macro outcomes 2. But Lib after Demo does not
Summary • Sequence matters: Democracies that follows Liberalizations give better results Liberalizations enacted by democracies less effective Eg: China vs Russia; Chile vs India • Why? • Better democracy in an open environment? Constraints on redistributive policies by democracies? • More far reaching liberalization in Dictatorship? Dictator who opens up the economy has fewer veto players, does it more effectively?