The relationship between globalization and economic growth in the developing countries remains controversial. Liberals argue that globalization will lead to higher economic growth and prosperity. Skeptics contend the opposite, where globalization processes might lead to increased inequality and lower economic growth. Previous studies have examined this issue with single indicators such as trade openness or foreign direct investment (FDI) or aid etc. In this study we make use of a comprehensive measure of globalization developed by Dreher (2006), which measures globalization along three important dimensions viz., economic, political, and social fields to assess the pros and cons of globalization. Our panel data results with a systems based GMM (SGMM) method show a small but significant positive association between globalization and economic growth for a panel of 21 low income African countries for the period 1970 – 2005.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number
16595.
Find related papers by JEL classification: O11 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Macroeconomic Analyses of Economic Development O10 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
David Dollar & Aart Kraay, 2004.
"Trade, Growth, and Poverty,"
Economic Journal,
Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages F22-F49, 02.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions: