Democracy, Autocracy and Macroeconomic Performance in Pakistan
AbstractPakistan showed a healthy growth rate of 5.6 percent during the entire history and faced many ups and down in the economic growth due to dramatic changes in the political regimes. The literature shows mixed results regarding the impact of autocracy or democracy on economic growth. The aggregate growth of the economy under the autocracy remained better as compared to democratic period. Financial Indicators show consistent path through out the history of Pakistan. Different trade policies are designed in different regime to run the external sector and the impact of each policy was different.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 28122.
Date of creation: 2008
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Kashmir Economic Review 1.XVII(2008): pp. 61-88
Democracy; Autocracy; Macroeconomic Performance; Pakistan; Growth; Financial Sector; Fiscal Sector; External Sector;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- O11 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Macroeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
- B22 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Macroeconomics
- P16 - Economic Systems - - Capitalist Systems - - - Political Economy of Capitalism
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.:
- Wittman, Donald, 1989. "Why Democracies Produce Efficient Results," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1395-1424, December.
- Brunetti, Aymo, 1998. "Policy volatility and economic growth: A comparative, empirical analysis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 35-52, February.
- Robert J. Barro & David B. Gordon, 1984.
"Rules, Discretion and Reputation in a Model of Monetary Policy,"
NBER Working Papers
1079, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Barro, Robert J. & Gordon, David B., 1983. "Rules, discretion and reputation in a model of monetary policy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 101-121.
- Kormendi, Roger C. & Meguire, Philip G., 1985. "Macroeconomic determinants of growth: Cross-country evidence," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 141-163, September.
- Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 1994.
"Is Inequality Harmful for Growth?,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 600-621, June.
- Nordhaus, William D, 1975. "The Political Business Cycle," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 169-90, April.
- Adam Przeworski & Fernando Limongi, 1993. "Political Regimes and Economic Growth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 51-69, Summer.
- Adnan Haider & Musleh ud Din & Ejaz Ghani, 2011.
"Consequences of Political Instability, Governance and Bureaucratic Corruption on Inflation and Growth: The Case of Pakistan,"
The Pakistan Development Review,
Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 50(4), pages 773-807.
- Haider, Adnan & Din, Musleh ud & Ghani, Ejaz, 2011. "Consequences of Political Instability, Governance and Bureaucratic Corruption on Inflation and Growth: The Case of Pakistan," MPRA Paper 35584, University Library of Munich, Germany.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.