IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

An empirical study of the limits and perspectives of institutional transfers

  • Möller, Marie
Registered author(s):

    The aim of this paper is to determine which country-specific characteristics promote and which impede the adoption of institutions. On the basis of a broad panel of 183 countries for the period between 1996 and 2010, we test whether there are tendencies towards a general improvement and towards a convergence of institutional quality. Based on the hypothesis that younger countries tend to adopt the smoothly functioning institutions of older ones, we ana-lyze which of the younger countries have good institutions and why. Among other things, we found that older countries do have better institutions than younger ones, but it is questionable that there is a causal effect. Moreover, the results of our empirical investigation show that having been a UK colony or the degree of economic openness have no effect on the institu-tional quality; while on the other hand, religion, region and dependency on natural resources do indeed have such effects. In addition, the potential role of international organizations with regard to nation building and institutional transfer is discussed.

    If 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.

    File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/59599/1/719040221.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW) in its series CIW Discussion Papers with number 02/2012.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2012
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:ciwdps:022012
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Universitätsstr. 14-16, 48143 Münster
    Phone: 02 51 / 83-2 29 10
    Fax: 02 51 / 83-2 83 99
    Web page: http://www.wiwi.uni-muenster.de/ciw/
    More information through EDIRC

    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Barro, Robert J, 1996. " Democracy and Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-27, March.
    2. Jesus Crespo Cuaresma & Harald Oberhofer & Paul Raschky, . "Oil and the duration of dictatorships," Working Papers 2008-24, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, University of Innsbruck.
    3. Edward L. Glaeser & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2004. "Do Institutions Cause Growth?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 271-303, 09.
    4. Bhattacharyya, Sambit & Hodler, Roland, 2010. "Natural resources, democracy and corruption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 608-621, May.
    5. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521764605 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Stefan Voigt, 2009. "How (Not) to Measure Institutions," MAGKS Papers on Economics 200937, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    7. Charles Rowley & Nathanael Smith, 2009. "Islam’s democracy paradox: Muslims claim to like democracy, so why do they have so little?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 273-299, June.
    8. Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1998. "The Quality of Government," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1847, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    9. Stephen Knack & Philip Keefer, 1995. "Institutions And Economic Performance: Cross-Country Tests Using Alternative Institutional Measures," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(3), pages 207-227, November.
    10. Lars P. Feld & Stefan Voigt, 2003. "Economic Growth and Judicial Independence: Cross Country Evidence Using a New Set of Indicators," CESifo Working Paper Series 906, CESifo Group Munich.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:ciwdps:022012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.