Quality of Growth Empirics: Comparative Gaps, Benchmarking and Policy Syndromes

Simplice Asongu, Jacinta Nwachukwu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study uses a new dataset to provide comparative gaps, benchmarking with best performers and policy syndromes of growth quality in 93 developing countries with data for the period 1990–2011. Sigma and Beta estimation strategies are used to provide between and within cross-country dispersions. The empirical evidence is based on: time, regions, income levels, resource-wealth, state fragility and time-consistent growth quality (GQ) performance. First, for ‘within dispersions’ the following outcomes are established: (1) GQ dispersions within fundamental characteristics have been decreasing over time, (2) From a time-dynamic view, countries within Asia and the Pacific have experienced the highest reduction in GQ differences while nations in the Middle East and North Africa (Central and Eastern European) region have witnessed the highest (lowest) differences, (3) From an income perspective, upper-middle-income (Low-income) countries have the lowest (highest) differences in GQ. (4) Resource-rich and Non-fragile countries have higher differences relative to their Resource-poor and Fragile counterparts respectively. Second, for ‘between dispersions’ and policy syndromes, we found two time-consistent extremities. (1) In decreasing need of policy intervention, the following are apparent for the Policy syndrome extreme: Hopeful, Fragile, Sub-Saharan African, Low-income and Resource-rich countries. (2) In the same line of policy inference, the following are apparent for the Syndrome-free extreme: Central and Eastern European, Asia and the Pacific, Latin American, Best Performing and Upper-middle-income countries. Their predispositions are clarified and policy implications discussed.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)861-882
Number of pages22
JournalJournal of Policy Modelling
Volume39
Issue number5
Early online date1 Sep 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Empirics
Benchmarking
Resources
Income
Asia
Empirical evidence
Developing countries
Fragility
Income level
European regions
Middle East and North Africa
Wealth
Policy implications
Inference
Low-income countries
Low income
Africa
Policy intervention

Keywords

  • Quality of growth
  • Development
  • Catch-up

Cite this

Quality of Growth Empirics: Comparative Gaps, Benchmarking and Policy Syndromes. / Asongu, Simplice; Nwachukwu, Jacinta.

In: Journal of Policy Modelling, Vol. 39, No. 5, 2017, p. 861-882.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Asongu, Simplice ; Nwachukwu, Jacinta. / Quality of Growth Empirics: Comparative Gaps, Benchmarking and Policy Syndromes. In: Journal of Policy Modelling. 2017 ; Vol. 39, No. 5. pp. 861-882.
@article{4b422d5af73642d8a80ccac5284512db,
title = "Quality of Growth Empirics: Comparative Gaps, Benchmarking and Policy Syndromes",
abstract = "This study uses a new dataset to provide comparative gaps, benchmarking with best performers and policy syndromes of growth quality in 93 developing countries with data for the period 1990–2011. Sigma and Beta estimation strategies are used to provide between and within cross-country dispersions. The empirical evidence is based on: time, regions, income levels, resource-wealth, state fragility and time-consistent growth quality (GQ) performance. First, for ‘within dispersions’ the following outcomes are established: (1) GQ dispersions within fundamental characteristics have been decreasing over time, (2) From a time-dynamic view, countries within Asia and the Pacific have experienced the highest reduction in GQ differences while nations in the Middle East and North Africa (Central and Eastern European) region have witnessed the highest (lowest) differences, (3) From an income perspective, upper-middle-income (Low-income) countries have the lowest (highest) differences in GQ. (4) Resource-rich and Non-fragile countries have higher differences relative to their Resource-poor and Fragile counterparts respectively. Second, for ‘between dispersions’ and policy syndromes, we found two time-consistent extremities. (1) In decreasing need of policy intervention, the following are apparent for the Policy syndrome extreme: Hopeful, Fragile, Sub-Saharan African, Low-income and Resource-rich countries. (2) In the same line of policy inference, the following are apparent for the Syndrome-free extreme: Central and Eastern European, Asia and the Pacific, Latin American, Best Performing and Upper-middle-income countries. Their predispositions are clarified and policy implications discussed.",
keywords = "Quality of growth, Development, Catch-up",
author = "Simplice Asongu and Jacinta Nwachukwu",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpolmod.2017.08.005",
language = "English",
volume = "39",
pages = "861--882",
journal = "Journal of Policy Modelling",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quality of Growth Empirics: Comparative Gaps, Benchmarking and Policy Syndromes

AU - Asongu, Simplice

AU - Nwachukwu, Jacinta

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - This study uses a new dataset to provide comparative gaps, benchmarking with best performers and policy syndromes of growth quality in 93 developing countries with data for the period 1990–2011. Sigma and Beta estimation strategies are used to provide between and within cross-country dispersions. The empirical evidence is based on: time, regions, income levels, resource-wealth, state fragility and time-consistent growth quality (GQ) performance. First, for ‘within dispersions’ the following outcomes are established: (1) GQ dispersions within fundamental characteristics have been decreasing over time, (2) From a time-dynamic view, countries within Asia and the Pacific have experienced the highest reduction in GQ differences while nations in the Middle East and North Africa (Central and Eastern European) region have witnessed the highest (lowest) differences, (3) From an income perspective, upper-middle-income (Low-income) countries have the lowest (highest) differences in GQ. (4) Resource-rich and Non-fragile countries have higher differences relative to their Resource-poor and Fragile counterparts respectively. Second, for ‘between dispersions’ and policy syndromes, we found two time-consistent extremities. (1) In decreasing need of policy intervention, the following are apparent for the Policy syndrome extreme: Hopeful, Fragile, Sub-Saharan African, Low-income and Resource-rich countries. (2) In the same line of policy inference, the following are apparent for the Syndrome-free extreme: Central and Eastern European, Asia and the Pacific, Latin American, Best Performing and Upper-middle-income countries. Their predispositions are clarified and policy implications discussed.

AB - This study uses a new dataset to provide comparative gaps, benchmarking with best performers and policy syndromes of growth quality in 93 developing countries with data for the period 1990–2011. Sigma and Beta estimation strategies are used to provide between and within cross-country dispersions. The empirical evidence is based on: time, regions, income levels, resource-wealth, state fragility and time-consistent growth quality (GQ) performance. First, for ‘within dispersions’ the following outcomes are established: (1) GQ dispersions within fundamental characteristics have been decreasing over time, (2) From a time-dynamic view, countries within Asia and the Pacific have experienced the highest reduction in GQ differences while nations in the Middle East and North Africa (Central and Eastern European) region have witnessed the highest (lowest) differences, (3) From an income perspective, upper-middle-income (Low-income) countries have the lowest (highest) differences in GQ. (4) Resource-rich and Non-fragile countries have higher differences relative to their Resource-poor and Fragile counterparts respectively. Second, for ‘between dispersions’ and policy syndromes, we found two time-consistent extremities. (1) In decreasing need of policy intervention, the following are apparent for the Policy syndrome extreme: Hopeful, Fragile, Sub-Saharan African, Low-income and Resource-rich countries. (2) In the same line of policy inference, the following are apparent for the Syndrome-free extreme: Central and Eastern European, Asia and the Pacific, Latin American, Best Performing and Upper-middle-income countries. Their predispositions are clarified and policy implications discussed.

KW - Quality of growth

KW - Development

KW - Catch-up

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2017.08.005

DO - 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2017.08.005

M3 - Article

VL - 39

SP - 861

EP - 882

JO - Journal of Policy Modelling

JF - Journal of Policy Modelling

IS - 5

ER -