OPENNESS-GROWTH NEXUS: EVIDENCE FROM TRANSITION COUNTRIES

Abstract

The main purpose of this study is to investigate causal relationship between openness and growth in transition countries (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan). For this purpose Panel causality test has been employed to the annual data for the period 1992-2015. First, stationary properties of the series were examined by the CADF test. After determining the co-integration relationship between the series by Westerlund (2007) co-integration test, Dumitrescu-Hurlin (2012) panel causality test was applied. According to the results obtained, in the long-run there is causal relationship running from openness to economic growth in the transition countries

Keywords

• openness, growth, transition countries, panel causality

DIŞA AÇIKLIK VE BÜYÜME İLİŞKİSİ:GEÇİŞ ÜLKELERİ ÖRNEĞİ

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı geçiş sürecindeki 5 ülkede (Kazakistan, Kırgızistan, Rusya Federasyonu, Tacikistan ve Özbekistan) dışa açıklık ve büyüme arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir. Bu amaç için 1992-2015 dönemine ait yıllık verilere Panel nedensellik testi uygulanmıştır. Öncelikle serilerin durağanlık analizi CADF testi ile incelenmiştir. Westerlund (2007) eşbütünleşme testi ile seriler arasında uzun dönem ilişkinin varlığı tespit edildikten sonra, Dumitrescu-Hurlin (2012) panel nedensellik testi uygulanmıştır. Elde edilen bulgulara göre dışa açıklık ve büyüme arasında uzun dönem ilişki bulunmuştur. Geçiş sürecindeki ülkelerde incelenen dönemde dışa açıklığın artması iktisadi büyümeyi artırdığı gözlenmektedir

Keywords

• dışa açıklık, büyüme, geçiş ülkeleri, panel nedensellik

ВЗАИМОСВЯЗЬ МЕЖДУ ОТКРЫТОСТЬЮ ЭКОНОМИКИ И ЕЕ РОСТОМ: НА ПРИМЕРЕ СТРАН С ПЕРЕХОДНОЙ ЭКОНОМИКОЙ

Abstract

Исследуются причинно-следственные связи между открытостью и экономическим ростом в странах (Казахстан, Кыргызстан, Российская Федерация, Таджикистан и Узбекистан) с переходной экономикой. Для этой цели был применен тест причинности для ежегодных данных за период 1992-2015 гг. Стационарные свойства данных были исследованы с помощью теста CADF. После определения наличия коинтеграции между переменными с помощью теста Westerlund (2007) был применен тест Dumitrescu-Hurlin (2012). Согласно полученным результатам, в долгосрочной перспективе существует 7 причинно-следственная связь между открытостью и экономическим ростом в странах с переходной экономикой.

Keywords

• открытость,экономический рост,страны с переходной экономикой,причинно-следственная связь,панельные данные

References

1. Afxentiou, P. C. Openness in the Canadian Economy: 1870-1988 / P. C. Afxentiou, A. Serletis // Applied Economics. – 1992. – №24(11). – P. 1191-98.
2. Anoruo, E. Openness and Economic Growth: Evidence From Selected Asean Countries / E. Anoruo, Y. Ahmad // The Indian Economic Journal. – 1999. – №47(3). – P. 110-17.
3. Bai, J. A panic attack on unit roots and cointegration / J. Bai, S. Ng // Econometrica. – 2004. – №72(4). – P. 1127-117.
4. Barro, R. J. Technological diffusion, convergence, and growth / R. J. Barro, X. Sala-i-Martin // Journal of Economic Growth. – 1997. – № 2(1). – P. 2-26.
5. Baldwin, R. E. Multinationals, endogenous growth, and technological spillovers: theory and evidence / R. E. Baldwin, H. Braconier, R. Forslid // Review of International Economics. – 2005. – №13 (5). – Р. 945-963.
6. Breusch, T. S. The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics / T. S. Breusch, A. R. Pagan // Review of Economic Studies. – Blackwell Publishing. – 1980. – №47(1). – Р. 239-253.
7. Breitung, J. The local power of some unit root tests for panel data, In: nonstationary panels, panels cointegration and dynamic panels / B. H. Baltagi. – Elsevier Amsterdam, 2000. – Р. 161-177.
8. Chandra, R. Export Growth and Economic Growth: An Investigation of Causality in India // Indian Economic Journal. – 2002. – №49(3). – Р. 64-73.

9. Chang, R. Openness Can be Good for Growth: the Role of Policy Complementarities / R. Chang, L. Kaltani, N. Loayza // Word Bank Policy Research Paper 3763. – Washington, DC: World Bank, 2005.
10. Dumitrescu, E.-I. Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels / E.-I. Dumitrescu, C. Hurlin // Economic Modelling. – 2012. – №29(4). – Р. 1450-1460.
11. Edwards, S. Openness, trade liberalization, and growth in developing countries // Journal of Economic Literature. – 1993. – №31(3). – Р. 1358-1393.
12. Frankel, J. A. Does Trade Cause Growth? / J. A. Frankel, D. Romer // American Economic Review. – 1999. – №89(3). – Р. 379-399.
13. Ghatak, S. Exports, Export Composition and Economic Growth: Cointegration and Causality Evidence for Malaysia / S. Ghatak, C. Milner, U. Utkulu // Applied Economics. – 1997. – №29. – Р. 213-223.
14. Grossman, G. M. Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy / G. M. Grossman, E. Helpman. – MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991.
15. Hadri, K. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panel data // Econometrics Journal. – 2000. – №3. – Р. 148-161.
16. Harris, R. D. Inference for unit roots in dynamic panels where the time dimension is fixed / R. D. Harris, E. Tzavalis // Journal of Econometrics. – 1999. – №91(2). – Р. 201-226.
17. Im, K. S. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panel / K. S. Im, M. H. Pesaran, Y. Shin // Journal of Econometrics. – 2003. – №115. – Р. 53-74.
18. Irwin D. Does Trade Raise Income?: Evidence from the Twentieth Century / D. Irwin, M. Tervio // Journal of International Economics. – 2002. – №58(1). – Р. 1-18.
19. Jim, L. Testing Export-Led Growth in South Asia / L. Jim, C. Ramesh // Journal of Economic Studies. – 2005. – №32(2). – Р. 132-145.
20. Jouini, J. Linkage between international trade and economic growth in GCC countries: empirical evidence from PMG estimation approach // The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development. – 2015. – №24(3). – Р. 341-372.
21. Kim, D.-H. Trade growth and income // The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development. – 2011. – №20(5). – Р. 677-709.
22. Койчуев, Т. К. Теория и практика экономического развития в переходный период / Т. К. Койчуев, М. Т. Койчуева // Реформа. – 2001. – №1. – С.50-56.
23. Kunst, R. M. On Exports and Productivity: A Causal Analysis / R. M. Kunst, D. Marin // Review of Economics and Statistics. – 1989. – №71. – Р. 699-703.
24. Levin, A. Unit root test in panel data: Asymptotic and finite sample properties / A. Levin, C. F. Lin, C. S. J. Chu // Journal of Econometrics. – 2002. – №108. – Р. 1-24.
25. Liu, X. An Empirical Investigation of the Causal Relationship between Openness and Economic Growth in China / X. Liu, H. Song, P. Romilly // Applied Economics. – 1997. – №29. – Р. 1679-87.
26. Moon, H. R. Panel evidence on units root in exchange rate interest rates with cross-sectional dependence / H. R. Moon, P. Perron. – Manuscript, USC, 2003.
27. Musila, J. W. The impact of trade openness on growth: the case of Kenya / J. W. Musila, Z. Yiheyis // Journal of Policy Modeling. – 2015. – №37. – Р. 342-354.
28. Oxley, L. Cointegration, Causality and Export-Led Growth in Portugal, 1865-1985 // Economics Letters. – 1993. – №43. – Р. 163-66.
29. Pesaran, H. General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels // Working Paper. University of Cambridge. – 2004. – №0435.
30. Pesaran, M. H. A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence // Journal of Applied Econometrics. – 2007. – №22. – Р. 265–312.
31. Sinha, T. The Relationship Between Openness and Economic Growth: Evidence from 124 Countries / T. Sinha, D. Sinha // Seoul Journal of Economics. – 1999. – №12(1). – Р. 67-83.
32. Shan, J. Z. Export-Led Growth Hypothesis for Australia: An Empirical Reinvestigation / J. Z. Shan, F. Sun // Applied Economics Letters. – 1998. – №5. – Р. 423-428.
33. Tsen, W. H. Granger Causality Tests Among Openness to International Trade, Human Capital Accumulation and Economic Growth in China: 1952-1999 // International Economic Journal. – 2006. – №20(3). – Р. 285-302.
34. Riezman, R. G. The Engine of Growth or its Handmaiden? A time-Series Assessment of Export-Led Growth” / R. G. Riezman, C. H. Whiteman, P. M. Summers // Empirical Economics. – 1996. – №21(1). – Р. 77-110.
35. Redding, S. Dynamic comparative advantage and the welfare effects of trade // Oxford Economic Papers. – 1999. – №51(1). – Р. 15-39.
36. Ulaşan, B. Trade openness and economic growth: panel evidence // Applied Economics Letters. – 2015. – №22(2). – Р. 163-167.
37. Utkulu, U. Does Trade Liberalization Cause a Long Run Economic Growth in Turkey / U. Utkulu, D. Özdemir // Economics of Planning. – 2004. – №3. – Р. 245-266.
38. Van Den Berg, H. Does Simultaneity Exaggerate Empirical Tests of Trade-Growth Relationship? // Applied Economics Letters. – 1996. – №3(4). – Р. 225-231.
39. Wacziarg, R. Measuring the Dynamic Gains from Trade // The World Bank Economic Review. – 2001. – №15(3). – Р. 393-429.
40. Westerlund, J. Testing for error correction in panel data // Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. – 2007. – №69(6). – Р. 709-748.
41. Young, A. Learning by doing and the dynamic effects of international trade // Quaterly Journal of Economics. – 1991. – №106(2). – Р. 369-405.
42. Zahonogo P. Trade and economic growth in developing countries: Evidence from subSaharan Africa // Journal of African Trade. – 2016. – №3. Р. 41-56.
43. www.worldbank.org. (19.09.2017).