Does Trade Cause Growth?

By JEFFREY A. FRANKEL AND DAVID ROMER*

Examining the correlation between trade and income cannot identify the direction
of causation between the two. Countries’ geographic characteristics, however, have
important effects on trade, and are plausibly uncorrelated with other determinants
of income. This paper therefore constructs measures of the geographic component
of countries’ trade, and uses those measures to obtain instrumental variables
estimates of the effect of trade on income. The results provide no evidence that
ordinary least-squares estimates overstate the effects of trade. Further, they suggest
that trade has a quantitatively large and robust, though only moderately statistically
significant, positive effect on income. (JEL F43, O40)

This paper is an empirical investigation of the
impact of international trade on standards of
living. From Adam Smith’s discussion of spe-
cialization and the extent of the market, to the
debates about import substitution versus export-
led growth, to recent work on increasing returns
and endogenous technological progress, econo-
mists interested in the determination of stan-
dards of living have also been interested in
trade. But despite the great effort that has been
devoted to studying the issue, there is little
persuasive evidence concerning the effect of
trade on income.
To see the basic difficulty in trying to esti-
mate trade’s impact on income, consider a
cross-country regression of income per person
on the ratio of exports or imports to GDP (and
other variables). Such regressions typically find
a moderate positive relationship.1 But this rela-
tionship may not reflect an effect of trade on
* Frankel: Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University, Cambridge, MA 02138; Romer: Department of
Economics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720.
We are grateful to Susanto Basu, Michael Dotsey, Steven
Durlauf, William Easterly, Robert Hall, Lars Hansen,
Charles Jones, N. Gregory Mankiw, Maurice Obstfeld,
Glenn Rudebusch, Paul Ruud, James Stock, Shangjin Wei,
Richard Zeckhauser, and the referees for helpful comments;
to Teresa Cyrus for outstanding research assistance and
helpful comments; and to the National Science Foundation
for financial support.
1 2
See, for example, Michael Michaely (1977), Gershon
Feder (1983), Roger C. Kormendi and Philip G. Meguire
(1985), Stanley Fischer (1991, 1993), David Dollar (1992),
Ross Levine and David Renelt (1992), Sebastian Edwards
(1993), Ann Harrison (1996), and the ordinary least-squares
379
income. The problem is that the trade share may
be endogenous: as Elhanan Helpman (1988),
Colin Bradford, Jr. and Naomi Chakwin (1993),
Rodrik (1995a), and many others observe,
countries whose incomes are high for reasons
other than trade may trade more.
Using measures of countries’ trade policies in
place of (or as an instrument for) the trade share
in the regression does not solve the problem.2
For example, countries that adopt free-market
trade policies may also adopt free-market do-
mestic policies and stable fiscal and monetary
policies. Since these policies are also likely to
affect income, countries’ trade policies are
likely to be correlated with factors that are omit-
ted from the income equation. Thus they cannot
be used to identify the impact of trade (Xavier
Sala-i-Martin, 1991).
This paper proposes an alternative instrument
for trade. As the literature on the gravity model
of trade demonstrates, geography is a powerful
determinant of bilateral trade (see, for example,
Hans Linneman, 1966, Frankel et al., 1995, and
Frankel, 1997). And as we show in this paper,
the same is true for countries’ overall trade:
simply knowing how far a country is from other
countries provides considerable information
regressions in Section II of this paper. Edwards (1995) and
Dani Rodrik (1995b) survey the literature.
For examples of this approach, see J. Bradford De
Long and Lawrence H. Summers (1991), Fischer (1991,
1993), Dollar (1992), William Easterly (1993), Edwards
(1993), Jong-Wha Lee (1993), Jeffrey D. Sachs and Andrew
Warner (1995), and Harrison (1996).
380 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW
about the amount that it trades. For example, the
fact that New Zealand is far from most other
countries reduces its trade; the fact that Belgium
is close to many of the world’s most populous
countries increases its trade.
Equally important, countries’ geographic
characteristics are not affected by their incomes,
or by government policies and other factors that
influence income. More generally, it is difficult
to think of reasons that a country’s geographic
characteristics could have important effects on
its income except through their impact on trade.
Thus, countries’ geographic characteristics can
be used to obtain instrumental variables esti-
mates of trade’s impact on income. That is the
goal of this paper.3
The remainder of the paper contains two
main sections. The first describes the impact of
geographic characteristics on trade in more de-
tail and uses geographic variables to construct
an instrument for international trade. As we
discuss there, there is one important complica-
tion to our basic argument that geographic vari-
ables can be used to construct an instrument for
international trade in a cross-country income
regression. Just as a country’s income may be
influenced by the amount its residents trade with
foreigners, it may also be influenced by the
amount its residents trade with one another.
And just as geography is an important determi-
nant of international trade, it is also an impor-
tant determinant of within-country trade. In
particular, residents of larger countries tend to
engage in more trade with their fellow citizens
simply because there are more fellow citizens to
trade with. For example, Germans almost surely
trade more with Germans than Belgians do with
Belgians. This suggests a second geography-
based test of the impact of trade on income: we
can test whether within-country trade raises in-
3
Lee (1993) also uses information on countries’ dis-
tances from one another to construct a measure of their
propensity to trade. His approach differs from ours in two
major respects. First, his measure is based not only on
countries’ geographic characteristics, but also on their ac-
tual trade patterns; thus it is potentially correlated with other
determinants of income. Second, he does not investigate the
relationship between income and his measure of the pro-
pensity to trade, but only the relationship between income
and the interaction of his measure with indicators of distor-
tionary trade policies.
JUNE 1999
come by asking whether larger countries have
higher incomes.
The reason that this issue complicates our test
of the impact of international trade is that coun-
try size and proximity to other countries are
negatively correlated. Because Germany is
larger than Belgium, the average German is
farther from other countries than the average
Belgian is. Thus in using proximity to estimate
international trade’s effect on income, it is
necessary to control for country size. Similarly,
in using country size to test whether within-
country trade raises income, it is necessary to
control for international trade.
To construct the instrument for interna-
tional trade, we first estimate a bilateral trade
equation and then aggregate the fitted values
of the equation to estimate a geographic com-
ponent of countries’ overall trade. In contrast
to conventional gravity equations for bilateral
trade, our trade equation includes only geo-
graphic characteristics: countries’ sizes, their
distances from one another, whether they
share a border, and whether they are land-
locked. This ensures that the instrument
depends only on countries’ geographic char-
acteristics, not on their incomes or actual
trading patterns. We find that these geo-
graphic characteristics are important determi-
nants of countries’ overall trade.
The second main section of the paper em-
ploys the instrument to investigate the impact of
trade on income. We estimate cross-country re-
gressions of income per person on international
trade and country size by instrumental variables
(IV), and compare the results with ordinary
least-squares (OLS) estimates of the same equa-
tions. There are five main findings.
First, we find no evidence that the positive
association between international trade and in-
come arises because countries whose incomes
are high for other reasons engage in more trade.
On the contrary, in every specification we con-
sider, the IV estimate of the effect of trade is
larger than the OLS estimate, often by a con-
siderable margin. Section II, subsection E, in-
vestigates possible reasons that the IV estimate
exceeds the OLS one.
Second, the point estimates suggest that the
impact of trade is substantial. In a typical spec-
ification, the estimates imply that increasing the
ratio of trade to GDP by one percentage point
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH?
raises income per person by between one-half
and two percent.
Third, the estimates also imply that in-
creased size raises income. This supports the
hypothesis that greater within-country trade
raises income.
Fourth, the large estimated positive effects of
trade and size are robust to changes in specifi-
cation, sample, and construction of the
instrument.
Fifth, the impacts of trade and size are not
estimated very precisely. The null hypothesis that
these variables have no effect is typically only
marginally rejected at conventional levels. As a
result, the estimates still leave considerable uncer-
tainty about the magnitudes of their effects.
I. Constructing the Instrument
A. Background
Our basic ideas can be described using a
simple three-equation model. First, average in-
come in country i is a function of economic
interactions with other countries (“international
trade” for short), economic interactions within
the country (“within-country trade”), and other
factors:
(1) ln Y i 5 a 1 b T i 1 g W i 1 « i .
Here Y i is income per person, T i is international
trade, W i is within-country trade, and « i reflects
other influences on income. As the vast litera-
ture on trade describes, there are many channels
through which trade can affect income—nota-
bly specialization according to comparative ad-
vantage, exploitation of increasing returns from
larger markets, exchange of ideas through com-
munication and travel, and spread of technology
through investment and exposure to new goods.
Because proximity promotes all of these types
of interactions, our approach cannot identify the
specific mechanisms through which trade af-
fects income.
The other two equations concern the determinants
of international and within-country trade. Interna-
tional trade is a function of a country’s proximity to
other countries, Pi, and other factors:
(2) T i 5 c 1 f P i 1 d i.
381
Similarly, within-country trade is a function of
the country’s size, S i , and other factors:
(3) W i 5 h 1 l S i 1 n i.
The residuals in these three equations, « i , d i ,
and n i , are likely to be correlated. For example,
countries with good transportation systems, or
with government policies that promote compe-
tition and reliance on markets to allocate re-
sources, are likely to have high international
and within-country trade given their geographic
characteristics, and high incomes given their
trade.
The key identifying assumption of our anal-
ysis is that countries’ geographic characteristics
(their P i ’s and S i ’s) are uncorrelated with the
residuals in equations (1) and (3). Proximity and
size are not affected by income or by other
factors, such as government policies, that affect
income. And as we observe in the introduction,
it is difficult to think of important ways that
proximity and size might affect income other
than through their impact on how much a coun-
try’s residents interact with foreigners and with
one another.
Given the assumption that P and S are un-
correlated with «, data on Y, T, W, P, and S
would allow us to estimate equation (1) by
instrumental variables: P and S are correlated
with T and W [by (2) and (3)], and are uncor-
related with « (by our identifying assumption).
Unfortunately, however, there are no data on
within-country trade. Ideally, we would want
data comparable to measures of international
trade. That is, we would want a measure of the
value of the exchange of all goods and services
among individuals within a country, both across
and within firms. This measure would probably
be many times GDP for most countries. But no
such measure exists.
To address this problem, we substitute (3)
into (1) to obtain
(4) ln Y i
5 a 1 b T i 1 g ~ h 1 l S i 1 n i! 1 « i
5 ~ a 1 gh ! 1 b T i 1 gl S i
1 ~ gn i 1 « i !.
382 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW
Our identifying assumption implies that P i and
S i are uncorrelated with the composite residual,
gn i 1 « i . Thus (4) can be estimated by instru-
mental variables, with P i and S i (and the con-
stant) as the instruments.
Note that estimation of (4) yields an esti-
mate not only of b, international trade’s im-
pact on income, but also of gl, country size’s
impact on income. Since the two components
of this coefficient are not identified sepa-
rately, one cannot obtain an estimate of g, the
effect of within-country trade on income. But
as long as l is positive—that is, as long as
larger countries have more within-country
trade—the sign of g is the same as the sign of
gl. Thus, although we cannot estimate the
magnitude of the impact of within-country
trade on income, we can obtain evidence
about its sign.
As we argue in the introduction (and verify
below), P i and S i are negatively correlated: the
larger a country is, the farther its typical resi-
dent is from other countries. Thus if we do not
control for size in (4), P i will be negatively
correlated with the residual, and thus will not be
a valid instrument. Intuitively, smaller countries
may engage in more trade with other countries
simply because they engage in less within-
country trade. This portion of the geographic
variation in international trade cannot be used to
identify trade’s impact on income. Similarly, if
we fail to control for T i in (4), S i will be
negatively correlated with the residual. Thus,
our approach requires us to examine the impacts
of both international trade and country size.
To estimate (4), we need data on four vari-
ables: income (Y ), international trade (T ), size
(S), and proximity (P). We measure the first
three in the usual ways. Our measure of income
is real income per person. Following standard
practice, we measure international trade as im-
ports plus exports divided by GDP. This is
clearly an imperfect measure of economic in-
teractions with other countries, an issue we re-
turn to in Section II, subsection E.4 Finally,
4
Using the log of the trade share instead of the level
does not affect our conclusions. Examining import and
export shares separately yields, not surprisingly, the result
that the geographic components of the two shares are almost
identical. Thus our approach cannot separate the effects of
imports and exports.
JUNE 1999
theory provides little guidance about the best
measure of size. We therefore use two natural
measures, population and area, both in logs. In
interpreting the results concerning size, we fo-
cus on the sum of the coefficients on log pop-
ulation and log area. Thus we consider the
impact of an increase in population and area
together, with no change in population density.
Such a change clearly increases the scope for
within-country trade.5
To measure proximity, we need an appropri-
ate weighted average of distance or ease of
exchange between a given country and every
other country in the world. To choose the
weights to put on the different counties, we
begin by estimating an equation for bilateral
trade as a function of distance, size, and so on.
We then use the estimated equation to find fitted
values of trade between countries i and j as a
share of i’s GDP. Finally, we aggregate over j
to obtain a geographic component of country i’s
total trade, T i . It is this geographic component
of T i that we use as our measure of proximity.
The remainder of this section describes the spe-
cifics of how we do this.
B. The Bilateral Trade Equation
Work on the gravity model of bilateral trade
shows that trade between two countries is neg-
atively related to the distance between them and
positively related to their sizes, and that a log-
linear specification characterizes the data fairly
well. Thus, a minimal specification of the bilat-
eral trade equation is
(5) ln~ t ij /GDPi ! 5 a 0 1 a 1 ln D ij 1 a 2 ln S i
1 a 3 ln S j 1 e ij ,
where t ij is bilateral trade between countries i
and j (measured as exports plus imports), D ij is
the distance between them, and S i and S j are
measures of their sizes.
This specification omits a considerable amount
of geographic information about trade. The equa-
tion that we estimate therefore differs from (5) in
5
Throughout the paper, we use the labor force as our
measure of population in computing income per person and
in measuring country size. Using total population instead
makes little difference to the results.
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH?
three ways. First, as described above, we include
two measures of size: log population and log area.
Second, whether countries are landlocked and
whether they have a common border have impor-
tant effects on trade; we therefore include dummy
variables for these factors. And third, a large part
of countries’ trade is with their immediate neigh-
bors. Since our goal is to identify geographic
influences on overall trade, we therefore include
interaction terms of all of the variables with the
common-border dummy.
The fact that we are measuring trade relative
to country i’s GDP means that we are already
including a measure of i’s size. We therefore do
not constrain the coefficients on the population
measures for the two countries, or the coeffi-
cients on the area measures, to be equal. We do,
however, constrain the coefficients on the land-
locked dummies, and their interactions with the
common-border dummy, to be equal for i and
j. 6 Thus, the equation we estimate is
~6! ln~ t ij /GDPi !
5 a 0 1 a 1 ln D ij 1 a 2 ln N i 1 a 3 ln A i
1 a 4 ln N j 1 a 5 ln A j 1 a 6 ~L i 1 L j !
1 a 7 B ij 1 a 8 B ij ln D ij 1 a 9 B ij ln N i
1 a 10 B ij ln A i 1 a 11 B ij ln N j
1 a 12 B ij ln A j 1 a 13 B ij ~L i 1 L j ! 1 e ij ,
where N is population, A is area, L is a dummy
for landlocked countries, and B is a dummy for
a common border between two countries.
C. Data and Results
We use the same bilateral trade data as
Frankel et al. (1995) and Frankel (1997); the
data are originally from the IFS Direction of
Trade statistics. They are for 1985, and cover
trade among 63 countries. Following these pa-
pers, we drop observations where recorded bi-
lateral trade is zero. Distance is measured as the
6
Allowing them to differ changes the results only triv-
ially.
383
great-circle distance between countries’ princi-
pal cities. The information on areas, common
borders, and landlocked countries is from Rand
McNally (1993). Finally, the data on population
are from the Penn World Table.7
The results are shown in Table 1. The first
column shows the estimated coefficients and
standard errors on the variables other than the
common-border dummy and its interactions.
These estimates are shown in the second
column.8
The results are generally as expected. Dis-
tance has a large and overwhelmingly signifi-
cant negative impact on bilateral trade; the
estimated elasticity of trade with respect to dis-
tance is slightly less (in absolute value) than
21. Trade between country i and country j is
strongly increasing in j’s size; the elasticity with
respect to j’s population is about 0.6. In addi-
tion, trade (as a fraction of i’s GDP) is decreas-
ing in i’s size and in j’s area. And if one of the
countries is landlocked, trade falls by about a
third.
Because only a small fraction of country pairs
share a border, the coefficients on the common-
border variables are not estimated precisely.
Nonetheless, the point estimates imply that
sharing a border has a considerable effect on
trade. Evaluated at the mean value of the vari-
ables conditional on sharing a border, the esti-
mates imply that a common border raises trade
by a factor of 2.2. The estimates also imply that
the presence of a common border alters the
effects of the other variables substantially. For
example, the estimated elasticity with respect to
country j’s population across a shared border is
0.47 rather than 0.61, and the estimated elastic-
ity with respect to distance is 20.70 rather than
20.85.
Most importantly, the regression confirms
7
We use Mark 5.6 of the table, which is distributed by
the National Bureau of Economic Research. This is an
updated version of the data described in Robert Summers
and Alan Heston (1991). The capital city is used as the
principal city, except for a small number of cases where the
capital is far from the center of the country (in terms of
population). In these cases, a more centrally located large
city is chosen. For the United States, for example, Chicago
rather than Washington is used as the principal city.
8
The coefficient on the common-border variable itself is
therefore shown as the coefficient on the interaction of the
common-border dummy with the constant.
384 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW JUNE 1999

TABLE 1—THE BILATERAL TRADE EQUATION where a is the vector of coefficients in (6) (a 0 ,
a 1 , ..., a 13 ), and Xij is the vector of right-hand
Variable Interaction side variables (1, ln D ij , ..., B ij [L i 1 L j ]). Our
Constant 26.38 5.10 estimate of the geographic component of coun-
(0.42) (1.78) try i’s overall trade share is then
Ln distance 20.85 0.15

Ln population
(country i)
(0.04)
20.24
(0.03)
(0.30)
20.29
(0.18)
(8) T̂ i 5 Oe
jÞi
â*Xij
.
Ln area 20.12 20.06
(country i) (0.02) (0.15) That is, our estimate of the geographic component
Ln population 0.61 20.14
(country j) (0.03) (0.18) of country i’s trade is the sum of the estimated
Ln area 20.19 20.07 geographic components of its bilateral trade with
(country j) (0.02) (0.15) each other country in the world.10
Landlocked 20.36 0.33 All that is needed to perform the calculations
(0.08) (0.33)
Sample size 3220
in equation (8) are countries’ populations and
R2 0.36 geographic characteristics. We therefore take
SE of regression 1.64 the sum in (8) not just over the countries cov-
ered by the bilateral trade data set, but over all
Notes: The dependent variable is ln( t ij /GDPi ). The first countries in the world.11 Similarly, we are able
column reports the coefficient on the variable listed, and the
second column reports the coefficient on the variable’s to find the constructed trade share, T̂, for all
interaction with the common-border dummy. Standard er- countries, not just those for which we have
rors are in parentheses. bilateral trade data. Since our income regres-
sions will also require data on trade and income,
however, we limit our calculation of T̂ to the
that geographic variables are major determi- countries in the Penn World Table. Thus we
nants of bilateral trade. The R 2 of the regression compute T̂ for 150 countries.
is 0.36. The next step is to aggregate across
countries and see if geographic variables are E. The Quality of the Instrument
also important to overall trade.9
Figure 1 is a scatterplot of the true overall
D. Implications for Aggregate Trade trade share, T, against the constructed share, T̂.
The figure shows that geographic variables ac-
To find the implications of our estimates for count for a major part of the variation in overall
the geographic component of countries’ overall trade. The correlation between T and T̂ is 0.62.
trade, we aggregate the fitted values from the As column (1) of Table 2 shows, a regression of
bilateral trade equation. That is, we first rewrite
equation (6) as

(7) ln~ t ij /GDPi ! 5 a9X ij 1 e ij ,

9
The standard errors reported in Table 1 are conven-
tional OLS standard errors. It is likely that the residuals of
the bilateral trade equation are not completely independent,
and thus that the reported standard errors are too low. But as
described in Section II, subsection B, uncertainty about the
parameters of the bilateral trade equation contributes only a
small amount to the standard errors of the cross-country
income regressions that we ultimately estimate. For exam-
ple, doubling the variance-covariance matrix of the esti-
mated parameters of the bilateral trade equation increases
the standard error of the coefficient on the trade share in our
baseline cross-country regression [column (2) of Table 3]
by less than 10 percent.
10
The expectation of t ij /GDPi conditional on Xij is
actually equal to e â*Xij times E[e e ij]. Since we are modeling
e ij as homoskedastic, however, E[e e ij] is the same for all
observations, and thus multiplies T̂ i by a constant. This has
no implications for the subsequent analysis, and is therefore
omitted for simplicity.
11
For convenience, we omit a handful of countries with
populations less than 100,000: Antigua and Barbuda,
Greenland, Kiribati, Liechtenstein, the Marshall Islands,
Micronesia, Monaco, Nauru, St. Kitts and Nevis, and San
Marino. In addition, for countries that are not in the Penn
World Table, we have data on population but not on the
labor force. To estimate the labor force for these countries,
we multiply their populations by the average ratio of the
labor force to population among the countries in the same
continent that are in the Penn World Table. We use the Penn
World Table’s definitions of the continents.
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH? 385

TABLE 2—THE RELATION BETWEEN ACTUAL AND

CONSTRUCTED OVERALL TRADE

(1) (2) (3)

Constant 46.41 218.58 166.97
(4.10) (12.89) (18.88)
Constructed trade share 0.99 0.45
(0.10) (0.12)
Ln population 26.36 24.72
(2.09) (2.06)
Ln area 28.93 26.45
(1.70) (1.77)
Sample size 150 150 150
R2 0.38 0.48 0.52
SE of regression 36.33 33.49 32.19

FIGURE 1. ACTUAL VERSUS CONSTRUCTED TRADE SHARE Notes: The dependent variable is the actual trade share.
Standard errors are in parentheses.

T on a constant and T̂ yields a coefficient on T̂

of essentially one and a t-statistic of 9.5.
As described in subsection A of this section,
however, the component of the constructed trade
share that is correlated with country size cannot be
used to estimate trade’s impact on income: smaller
countries may engage in more international trade
but in less within-country trade. That is, our iden-
tification of trade’s impact on income will come
from the component of the excluded exogenous
variable (the constructed trade share) that is un-
correlated with the other exogenous variables (the
size measures).
The constructed trade share is in fact highly
correlated with country size. For example, the
five countries with the smallest constructed
shares all have areas over 1,000,000 square
miles, and the five with the largest constructed
shares all have areas under 10,000 square miles.
A regression of the constructed trade share on a
constant, log population, and log area yields
negative and significant coefficients on both
size measures and an R 2 of 0.45.
Thus in examining whether geographic variables
provide useful information about international trade,
we need to ask whether they provide information
beyond that contained in country size. Columns (2)
and (3) of Table 2 therefore compare a regression of
the actual trade share on a constant and the two size
measures with a regression that also includes our
constructed trade share. As expected, size has a neg-
ative effect on trade. Area is highly significant, while
population is moderately so. The coefficient on the
constructed trade share falls by slightly more than
half when the size controls are added.
The important message of columns (2) and (3),
however, is that the constructed trade share still
contains a considerable amount of information
about actual trade. For example, its t-statistic in
column (3) is 3.6; this corresponds to an F-statistic
of 13.1. As the results in the next section show,
this means that the constructed trade share con-
tains enough information about actual trade for IV
estimation to produce only moderate standard er-
rors for the estimated impact of trade. Further-
more, the results of Douglas Staiger and James H.
Stock (1997), Charles R. Nelson and Richard
Startz (1990), and Alastair R. Hall et al. (1996)
imply that these first-stage F-statistics are large
enough that the finite-sample bias of instrumental
variables—which biases the IV estimate toward
the OLS estimate—is unlikely to be a serious
problem in our IV regressions.
Figure 2, Panel A, shows the partial association
between the actual and constructed trade shares
controlling for the size measures. The figure
shows that although the relationship is not as
strong as the simple relationship shown in
Figure 1, it is still positive. The figure also shows
that there are two large outliers in the relationship:
Luxembourg, which has an extremely high fitted
trade share given its size, and Singapore, which
has an extremely high actual trade share given its
size. Figure 2, Panel B, therefore shows the scat-
terplot with these two observations omitted. Again
there is a definite positive relationship.12
12
When these two observations are dropped from the
regression in column (3) of Table 2, the coefficient on the
constructed trade share rises to 0.69, but the t-statistic falls
386 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW
FIGURE 2. PARTIAL ASSOCIATION BETWEEN ACTUAL AND
CONSTRUCTED TRADE SHARE
The five countries with the smallest con-
structed trade shares controlling for size are
Western Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, Mauritius, and
Vanuatu. All five are geographically isolated
islands. Of the five, Western Samoa and
Tonga have large negative shares given their
size; Fiji and Mauritius have moderate nega-
tive shares; and Vanuatu has a moderate pos-
itive share. At the other extreme, the five
countries with the highest constructed trade
shares controlling for size are Luxembourg,
Belize, Jordan, Malta, and Djibouti. Of these
five, Luxembourg and Jordan have large pos-
itive actual trade shares controlling for size,
and the other three have moderate positive
to 3.2 (corresponding to an F-statistic of 10.1). This
F-statistic remains large enough that the finite-sample bias
of the IV estimates is still likely to be small.
JUNE 1999
shares. In sum, countries’ geographic charac-
teristics do provide considerable information
about their overall trade.
II. Estimates of Trade’s Effect on Income
A. Specifications and Samples
This section uses the instrument constructed
in Section I to investigate the relationship be-
tween trade and income. The dependent vari-
able in our regressions is log income per person.
The data are for 1985 and are from the Penn
World Table. Our basic specification is
(9) ln Y i 5 a 1 bT i
1 c 1 ln N i 1 c 2 ln A i 1 u i ,
where Y i is income per person in country i, T i is
the trade share, and N i and A i are population
and area. This specification differs from the one
derived from the simple model in Section I,
subsection A, only by including two measures
of size rather than one [see equation (4)].
We do not include any additional variables in
the regression. There are of course many other
factors that may affect income. But our argu-
ment about the appropriateness of using
geographic characteristics to construct an in-
strument for trade implies that there is no strong
reason to expect additional independent deter-
minants of income to be correlated with our
instrument; thus they can be included in the
error term. In addition, if we included other
variables, the estimates of trade’s impact on
income would leave out any effects operating
through its impact on these variables. Suppose,
for example, that increased trade raises the rate
of return on domestic investment and therefore
increases the saving rate. Then by including the
saving rate in the regression, we would be omit-
ting trade’s impact on income that operates via
saving.
As an alternative to including control vari-
ables, in subsection D of this section, we de-
compose countries’ incomes in various ways
and ask how trade affects each component. In
doing so, we can obtain information about the
channels through which trade affects income.
For example, we ask how trade affects both in-
come at the beginning of the sample and growth
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH? 387

over the sample period.13 TABLE 3—TRADE AND INCOME

Appendix Table A1 reports the basic data

(1) (2) (3) (4)
used in the tests. It lists, for each country in the
sample, its actual trade share in 1985, its con- Estimation OLS IV OLS IV
structed trade share, its area and 1985 popula- Constant 7.40 4.96 6.95 1.62
(0.66) (2.20) (1.12) (3.85)
tion, and its income per person in 1985.14 Trade share 0.85 1.97 0.82 2.96
We focus on two samples. The first is the full (0.25) (0.99) (0.32) (1.49)
set of 150 countries covered by the Penn World Ln population 0.12 0.19 0.21 0.35
Table. Our instrument is only moderately cor- (0.06) (0.09) (0.10) (0.15)
related with trade once we control for size, and Ln area 20.01 0.09 20.05 0.20
(0.06) (0.10) (0.08) (0.19)
much of the variation is among the smallest Sample size 150 150 98 98
countries in the sample. Thus it is important to R2 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.09
consider a relatively broad sample. And as we SE of
describe below, the results for this sample are regression 1.00 1.06 1.04 1.27
First-stage F
robust to the exclusion of outliers and of obser- on excluded
vations where the data are potentially the most instrument 13.13 8.45
subject to error.
Our second sample is the 98-country sample Notes: The dependent variable is log income per person in
considered by N. Gregory Mankiw et al. (1992). 1985. The 150-country sample includes all countries for
which the data are available; the 98-country sample includes
The countries in this sample generally have only the countries considered by Mankiw et al. (1992).
more reliable data; they are also generally Standard errors are in parentheses.
larger, and thus less likely to have their incomes
determined by idiosyncratic factors. In addition,
data limitations require that we employ a eficial. The point estimates imply that increasing
smaller sample when we examine the channels both population and area by one percent raises
through which trade affects income. income per person by 0.1 percent.
Column (2) reports the IV estimates of the
B. Basic Results same equation. The trade share is treated as
endogenous, and the constructed trade share is
Table 3 reports the regressions. Column (1) is used as an instrument.15 The coefficient on trade
an OLS regression of log income per person on a rises sharply. That is, the point estimate sug-
constant, the trade share, and the two size mea- gests that examining the link between trade and
sures. The regression shows a statistically and income using OLS understates rather than over-
economically significant relationship between states the effect of trade. The estimates now
trade and income. The t-statistic on the trade share imply that a one-percentage-point increase in
is 3.5; the point estimate implies that an increase the trade share raises income per person by 2.0
in the share of one percentage point is associated percent. In addition, the hypothesis that the IV
with an increase of 0.9 percent in income per coefficient is zero is marginally rejected at con-
person. The regression also suggests that, control- ventional levels (t 5 2.0). The coefficient is
ling for international trade, there is a positive
(though only marginally significant) relation be-
tween country size and income per person; this 15
Throughout, the standard errors for the IV regressions
supports the view that within-country trade is ben- account for the fact that the instrument depends on the
parameters of the bilateral trade equation. That is, the vari-
ance-covariance matrix of the coefficients is estimated as
the usual IV formula plus (­b̂/­â)V̂(­b̂/­â)9, where b̂ is the
13
Fischer (1993) uses a similar approach to investigate vector of estimated coefficients from the cross-country in-
the effects of inflation. Frankel et al. (1996) and the working come regression, â is the vector of estimated coefficients
paper version of this paper (Frankel and Romer, 1996) from the bilateral trade equation, and V̂ is the estimated
investigate the effects of controlling for physical and human variance-covariance matrix of â. In all cases, this additional
capital accumulation and population growth, and find that term makes only a small contribution to the standard errors.
this does not change the character of the results. In the regression in column (2) of Table 3, for example, this
14
The other data used in the analysis are available from correction increases the standard error on the trade share
the authors on request. from 0.91 to 0.99.
388 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW
much less precisely estimated under IV than
under OLS, however. As a result, the hypothesis
that the IV and OLS estimates are equal cannot
be rejected (t 5 1.2). 16
Moving from OLS to IV also increases the
estimated impact of country size. The estimated
effect of raising both population and area by one
percent is now to increase income per person by
almost 0.3 percent. This estimate is marginally
significantly different from zero (t 5 1.8).
One interesting aspect of the results concern-
ing size is that the coefficient on area is positive.
One might expect increased area, controlling for
population, to reduce within-country trade and
thus lower income. One possibility is that the
positive coefficient is due to sampling error: the
t-statistic on area is slightly less than one. An-
other is that greater area has a negative impact
via decreased within-country trade, but a larger
positive impact via increased natural resources.
It is because of this possibility that we focus on
the sum of the coefficients on log population
and log area in our discussion. As described
above, this sum shows the effects of increased
size with population density held constant. In
addition, as we show below, using population
alone to measure size has no major impact on
the results.
Columns (3) and (4) consider the 98-country
sample. This change has no great effect on the
OLS estimates of the coefficients on trade and
size, but raises both the IV estimates and their
standard errors considerably. The t-statistics for
the OLS estimates fall moderately, while those
for the IV estimates change little.
Frankel et al. (1996) and the working paper
version of this paper (Frankel and Romer, 1996)
consider a second approach to constructing the
instrument for trade. In addition to using infor-
mation on the proximity of a country’s trading
16
That is, we perform a Hausman test (Jerry A. Haus-
man, 1978) of the hypothesis that actual trade is uncorre-
lated with the residual, and thus that OLS is unbiased.
Under the null, asymptotically the OLS and IV estimates of
trade’s impact differ only because of sampling error. As a
result, the difference between the two estimates divided by
the standard error of the difference is distributed asymptot-
ically as a standard normal variable. Furthermore, under the
null the variance of the difference between the IV and OLS
estimates is just the difference in their variances; that is, the
standard error of the difference is the square root of the
difference in the squares of their standard errors.
JUNE 1999
partners, these papers use some information
about the partners’ incomes. Specifically, they
include measures of physical and human capital
accumulation and population growth. As those
papers explain, one can argue that the factor
accumulation of a country’s trading partners is
uncorrelated with determinants of the country’s
income other than its trade and factor accumu-
lation: once one accounts for the impact of a
country’s own factor accumulation on its in-
come, the most evident channel through which
its partners’ factor accumulation may affect its
income is by increasing the partners’ incomes,
and thus increasing the amount the country
trades. Thus if one controls for the country’s
own factor accumulation, its partners’ factor
accumulation can be used in constructing the
instrument.
Not surprisingly, using more information in
constructing the instrument increases the preci-
sion of the IV estimates of trade’s effect on
income. But the estimated effect of trade is not
systematically different when one moves to the
alternative instrument; this supports the argu-
ment that it is a valid instrument. The overall
results are similar to those we obtain with our
basic instrument: the IV estimates of trade’s
impact on income are much larger than the OLS
estimates, and are marginally significantly dif-
ferent from zero.
C. Robustness
A natural question is whether the results are
robust. We consider robustness along four
dimensions.
First, as described above, Luxembourg and
Singapore are major outliers in the relationship
between the actual and constructed trade shares.
Dropping either or both of these observations,
however, does not change the basic pattern of
the results. The most noticeable change occurs
when Luxembourg is dropped from the baseline
regressions in columns (1) and (2) of Table 3.
This has effects similar to those of moving to
the 98-country sample (which does not include
Luxembourg): the OLS estimate of the effect of
trade changes little, but the IV estimate and its
standard error rise. Similarly, adding Luxem-
bourg to the regressions in columns (3) and (4)
of Table 3 moderately reduces the IV estimate
of the effect of trade.
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH?
A second concern is the possibility that sys-
tematic differences among parts of the world are
driving the results. That is, it could be that our
IV estimates of the impact of trade arise because
the countries in certain regions of the world
have systematically higher constructed trade
shares given their size and also have systemat-
ically higher incomes. In this case, our findings
might be the result not of trade, but of other
features of those regions.
To address this concern, we reestimate the re-
gressions in Table 3 including a dummy variable
for each continent. This modification substantially
increases the standard errors of the IV estimates of
the impact of trade on income. As a result, the
estimates are no longer significantly different
from zero. In addition, the IV estimate of the
impact of trade for the 150-country sample [col-
umn (2) of Table 3] falls to only moderately above
the OLS estimate. When Luxembourg is dropped
from the sample, however, the IV estimate returns
to being much larger than the OLS estimate. For
the 98-country sample, in contrast, inclusion of the
continent dummies raises the IV estimate slightly
and lowers the OLS estimate slightly.
As an alternative way of considering the im-
pact of differences across parts of the world, we
follow Robert E. Hall and Charles I. Jones
(1999) and include countries’ distance from the
equator as a control variable. This variable may
reflect the impact of climate, or it may be a
proxy for omitted country characteristics that
are correlated with latitude. With this approach,
the IV estimate of trade and size’s effects are
virtually identical to the OLS estimate for the
full sample, and only moderately larger than the
OLS estimate for the 98-country sample. Thus
there is some evidence that systematic differ-
ences among regions are important to our find-
ing that the IV estimates of trade’s effects
exceed the OLS estimates. Even in this case,
however, there is still no evidence that the OLS
estimates overstate trade’s effects.
Third, our data are highly imperfect in various
ways. Potentially most important, for the major
oil-producing countries much of measured GDP
represents the sale of existing resources rather
than genuine value added. Since these countries
have among the highest measured incomes in the
sample, they have the potential to affect the results
substantially. In fact, however, they are not im-
portant to our findings: they are already absent
389
from the 98-country sample, and excluding them
from the 150-country sample changes the esti-
mates only slightly. As a more general check of
the possible importance of data problems, we use
the Penn World Table’s summary assessments of
the quality of countries’ data to exclude the coun-
tries with the poorest data from the sample. Spe-
cifically, we exclude all countries whose data are
assigned a grade of “D.” This reduces the 150-
country sample to 99, and the 98-country sample
to 77. These reductions in the sample sizes mod-
erately increase the standard errors of both the
OLS and IV estimates of the impact of trade. The
point estimates change little, however.
Finally, one can imagine reasons that virtu-
ally all the variables used in finding the geo-
graphic component of countries’ trade might
have some endogenous component that is cor-
related with the error term in the income equa-
tion. For example, whether countries have
access to an ocean may be endogenous in the
truly long run, and may be determined in part by
other forces that affect income.17 Similarly,
population is endogenous in the very long run.
To check that no single variable that could
conceivably be endogenous is driving the re-
sults, we redo the construction of the instrument
and the regressions in Table 3 in five ways:
omitting the landlocked variable from the bilat-
eral trade equation; excluding population from
this equation; omitting all interactions with the
common-border dummy from this equation; us-
ing total population rather than the labor force
both in measuring countries’ sizes and in com-
puting income per person; and excluding area
from both equations.
None of these changes has a major effect on
the results. Although the changes sometimes
affect the IV estimates noticeably, in every case
they remain much larger than the OLS esti-
mates. Moreover, there is no systematic ten-
dency for the changes to reduce the IV
17
The potential endogeneity of characteristics of borders
other than whether countries are landlocked is unlikely to
cause serious difficulties, for two reasons. First, the location
of borders is largely determined by forces other than gov-
ernment policies and other determinants of current income;
that is, the endogenous component of borders appears small.
Second, because our estimates control for within-country
trade, what is key to our estimates is the overall distribution
of population, not the placement of country borders.
390 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW
estimates; indeed, there are several cases where
the changes raise the estimate considerably, or
reduce its standard error considerably. Thus, our
findings do not hinge on the use of any one of
these variables in constructing the fitted trade
shares.
D. The Channels Through Which Trade
Affects Income
The results thus far provide no information
about the mechanisms through which trade
raises income. To shed some light on this issue,
we decompose income and examine trade’s im-
pact on each component.
We consider two decompositions of income.
The first follows Hall and Jones (1999). Sup-
pose output in country i is given by
(10) Y i 5 K ai @e f ~S i! A i N i # 12 a ,
where K and N are capital and labor, S is
workers’ average years of schooling, f[ gives
the effects of schooling, and A is a productivity
term. Equation (10) could be used to decompose
differences in output per worker into the con-
tributions of capital per worker, schooling, and
productivity. As Hall and Jones note, however,
an increase in A leads to a higher value of K for
a given investment rate. Following Peter Kle-
now and Andrés Rodriguez-Clare (1997), they
therefore rewrite (10) as
(11) Y i 5 ~K i /Y i ! a /~12 a ! e f ~S i! A i N i .
Dividing both sides by N i and taking logs yields
a age points. For the second decomposition,
(12) ln~Y i /N i ! 5 ln~K i /Y i !
12a
1 f ~S i ! 1 ln A i .
Equation (12) expresses the log of output per
worker as the sum of the contributions of capital
depth (reflecting such factors as investment and
population growth), schooling, and productiv-
ity. Hall and Jones set a 5 1⁄3 and let f[ be a
piecewise linear function with coefficients
based on microeconomic evidence. This allows
them to measure each component of (12) other
JUNE 1999
than ln A i directly from the data, and then find
ln A i as a residual.
Our second decomposition of income is sim-
pler. We write log output per worker in 1985 as
the sum of its value at the beginning of the
sample (1960) plus the change during the sam-
ple period:
~13! ln~Y i /N i ! 1985
5 ln~Y i /N i ! 1960
1 @ln~Y i /N i ! 1985 2ln~Y i /N i ! 1960 #.
For both decompositions, we regress each
component of income on a constant, the trade
share, and the size measures. Again, we con-
sider both OLS and IV. Since the decomposi-
tions cannot be performed for the full sample,
we consider only the 98-country sample. The
results are reported in Table 4. The first three
pairs of columns show the results for the Hall
and Jones decomposition, and the remaining
two pairs show the results for the decomposition
into initial income and subsequent growth.
With both decompositions, the estimates
using instrumental variables suggest that
trade increases income through each compo-
nent of income. For the first decomposition,
the estimated impacts of trade on physical
capital depth and schooling are moderate, and
its estimated impact on productivity is large.
The estimates imply that a one-percentage-
point increase in the trade share raises the
contributions of both physical capital depth
and schooling to output by about one-half of
a percentage point, and the contribution of
productivity to output by about two percent-
trade’s estimated effects on both initial in-
come and subsequent growth are large. Here
the estimates imply that a one-percentage-
point increase in the trade share raises both
initial income and the change over the sample
period by about one and a half percentage
points. Further, in every case, the estimates
suggest that country size, controlling for in-
ternational trade, is beneficial. And in every
case the IV estimates of the effects of inter-
national trade and country size are substan-
tially larger than the OLS estimates.
The standard errors of the IV estimates are
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH? 391

TABLE 4—TRADE AND THE COMPONENTS OF INCOME

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Dependent a
ln~K i /Y i !
variable 12a f (S i ) ln A i ln(Y/N) 1960 D ln(Y/N)
Estimation OLS IV OLS IV OLS IV OLS IV OLS IV
Constant 20.72 21.29 0.10 20.37 7.47 3.05 7.45 4.27 20.50 22.65
(0.34) (0.93) (0.30) (0.81) (0.74) (2.84) (1.03) (3.07) (0.39) (1.66)
Trade share 0.36 0.59 0.18 0.37 0.27 2.04 0.38 1.66 0.45 1.31
(0.10) (0.36) (0.08) (0.31) (0.21) (1.10) (0.29) (1.19) (0.11) (0.65)
Ln population 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.21 0.32 0.09 0.17 0.12 0.18
(0.03) (0.04) (0.03) (0.03) (0.06) (0.11) (0.09) (0.12) (0.03) (0.06)
Ln area 0.04 0.07 20.01 0.01 20.13 0.08 20.02 0.13 20.03 0.07
(0.02) (0.05) (0.02) (0.04) (0.05) (0.14) (0.07) (0.15) (0.03) (0.08)
Sample size 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98
R2 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.08 0.14 0.06 0.03 0.02 0.24 0.20
SE of
regression 0.32 0.33 0.28 0.29 0.69 0.92 0.96 1.06 0.36 0.47
First-stage F
on excluded
instrument 8.45 8.45 8.45 8.45 8.45

Note: Standard errors are in parentheses.

large, however. For productivity and for growth
over the sample period, the estimates of trade’s
effect are marginally significantly different
from zero (t-statistics of 1.8 and 2.0, respective-
ly). For the other dependent variables, the t-
statistics are between 1.2 and 1.6. Similarly, the
t-statistic for the sum of the coefficients on
population and area is 1.9 for productivity, 2.0
for growth, and between 1.3 and 1.5 for the
other dependent variables. Thus, although the
estimates suggest that international and within-
country trade raise income through several dif-
ferent channels, they do not allow us to
determine their contributions through each
channel with great precision.
The results also provide no evidence that
OLS is biased. The IV and OLS estimates of
trade’s impact never differ by a statistically
significant amount. Indeed, the t-statistic for the
null that the estimates are equal exceeds 1.5
only once.18
18
The result that the IV estimates of the effects of trade
and country size on each component of income are positive
is extremely robust to the exclusion of outliers, the addition
of continent dummies and latitude, the omission of coun-
tries with the most questionable data, the use of less infor-
mation in constructing the instrument, and expanding the
sample to include as many countries as possible (132 coun-
tries for the Hall and Jones decomposition, 127 countries for
E. Why Are the IV Estimates Greater Than
the OLS Estimates?
Both the simple model presented in Section I,
subsection A, and prevailing views about the
association between trade and income suggest
that IV estimates of trade’s impact on income
will be less than OLS estimates. There are four
main reasons. First, countries that adopt free-
trade policies are likely to adopt other policies
the decomposition into initial income and subsequent
growth). The one exception is that in the IV regression with
f (S i ) as the dependent variable, both the coefficient on
trade and the sum of the coefficients on population and area
are very slightly negative when latitude is included as a
control. Likewise, the finding that the IV estimates of the
effects of trade and size on productivity, initial income, and
growth over the sample are larger than the OLS estimates is
extremely robust. Again there is only a single exception:
when latitude is included, the IV estimates of the impact of
trade and of the combined effect of population and area on
initial income are slightly smaller than the OLS estimates.
The result that the IV estimates of trade’s and size’s effects
on capital depth and schooling are larger than the OLS
estimates, on the other hand, is only moderately robust: for
several of our robustness checks, the IV estimates are
smaller. The difference is never large, however.
Finally, Hall and Jones’s data are for 1988 rather than
1985. This is not important, however: redoing the basic
regressions in Table 3 for the 98-country sample using 1988
income per worker changes the results only trivially.
392 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW JUNE 1999

that raise income. Second, countries that are

wealthy for reasons other than trade are likely to
have better infrastructure and transportation
systems. Third, countries that are poor for rea-
sons other than low trade may lack the institu-
tions and resources needed to tax domestic
economic activity, and thus may have to rely on
tariffs to finance government spending. And
fourth, increases in income coming from
sources other than trade may increase the vari-
ety of goods that households demand and shift
the composition of their demand away from
basic commodities toward more processed,
lighter weight goods. All of these consider-
ations would lead to positive correlation be-
tween trade and the error term in an OLS
regression, and thus to upward bias in the OLS
estimate of trade’s effects. And since there is no
reason to expect correlation between proximity
and these various omitted country characteris-
tics, there is no reason to expect the IV estimate
to suffer a similar bias. But we find that the IV
estimate is almost always considerably larger
than the OLS estimate. Although the difference
is not statistically significant, the fact that it is
large and positive is surprising.
The OLS estimate is determined by the par-
FIGURE 3. PARTIAL ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN INCOME AND
tial association between income and trade, THE TRADE SHARE
while the IV estimate is determined by the par-
tial association between income and the com-
ponent of trade correlated with the instrument. of 0.26). It is this smaller relationship that
Thus, mechanically, the fact that the OLS esti- causes the OLS estimate to be less than the IV
mate is smaller than the IV estimate means that estimate.
income’s partial association with the compo- The figures show that the difference between
nent of trade that is not correlated with the the OLS and IV estimates is not due to a handful
instrument is weaker than its partial association of observations. (Recall that including Luxem-
with the component that is correlated. Figure 3 bourg and Singapore reduces the IV estimate of
presents these two partial associations. Since trade’s effects. Thus the only major outliers are
Luxembourg and Singapore are outliers in the not the source of the gap between the OLS and
relationship between trade and the instrument, IV estimates, but in fact reduce it.) In addition,
they are omitted. Panel A of the figure shows examining which specific countries are impor-
the positive partial association between income tant to the estimates suggests that there is no
and the component of trade correlated with the simple omitted country characteristic that is
instrument; it is this association that underlies driving the results.
the positive coefficient on trade in the basic IV The observations that are responsible for
regression [column (2) of Table 3]. Panel B of the high estimated IV coefficient are those at
the figure shows that there is also a positive the upper right and lower left of Panel A. The
partial association between income and the most influential observations at the upper
component of trade not correlated with the in- right are Qatar, Belgium, the United States,
strument. This association, though statistically and Israel. The most influential observations
significant, is smaller than the partial associa- at the lower left are Malawi, Lesotho, Bu-
tion in Panel A (b̂ 5 0.75, with a standard error rundi, and Haiti. Similarly, the observations
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH?
that are lowering the OLS estimate relative to
the IV estimate are those in the lower right
and upper left of Panel B. The most influential
observations at the lower right are Qatar,
Trinidad and Tobago, Hong Kong, and Syria,
while the most influential observations at the
upper left are Lesotho, Mauritania, Togo, and
Belize.
Thus, in both cases the low-income coun-
tries are, not surprisingly, disproportionately
from sub-Saharan Africa. But there is no ev-
ident characteristic other than proximity that
distinguishes the countries with low proxim-
ity and low income from those with high
proximity and high income. Similarly, there is
no clear characteristic other than trade that
differentiates the countries with low residual
trade and high income from those with high
residual trade and low income. Together with
our earlier results, this suggests that the find-
ing that the IV estimate exceeds— or at least
does not fall short of—the OLS estimate is
robust and not the result of omitted country
characteristics.
There are two leading explanations of the
fact that the IV estimate of trade’s impact
exceeds the OLS estimate. The first is that it
is due to sampling variation. That is, although
there no reason to expect systematic correla-
tion between the instrument and the residual,
it could be that by chance they are positively
correlated. The principal evidence supporting
this possibility is that the differences between
the IV and OLS estimates, though quantita-
tively large, are well within the range that can
arise from sampling error. In our baseline
regressions [columns (1) and (2) of Table 3],
the t-statistic for the null hypothesis that the
OLS and IV estimates are equal is 1.2 ( p 5
0.25). And in the variations on the baseline
regression that we consider, this t-statistic
never exceeds 2, and it is almost always less
than 1.5. Moreover, in a few cases it is essen-
tially zero. Thus, if one believes that theory
provides strong grounds for believing that
OLS estimates are biased up, our IV estimates
do not provide a compelling reason for chang-
ing this belief.
The second candidate explanation of the
finding that the IV estimates exceed the OLS
estimates is that OLS is in fact biased down.
The literal shipping of goods between coun-
393
tries does not raise income. Rather, trade is a
proxy for the many ways in which interac-
tions between countries raise income—spe-
cialization, spread of ideas, and so on. Trade
is likely to be highly, but not perfectly, cor-
related with the extent of such interactions.
Thus, trade is an imperfect measure of in-
come-enhancing interactions among coun-
tries. And since measurement error leads to
downward bias, this would mean that OLS
would lead to an understatement of the effect
of income-enhancing interactions.19
To explore this idea, consider the following
simple model. Average income in country i is
given by
(14) ln Y i 5 a 1 b 1 I 1i 1 b 2 I 2i 1 ... 1 b N I Ni
1 cS i 1 e i ,
where I 1 , I 2 , ..., I N are measures of the various
ways in which interactions among countries af-
fect income. This equation has the same form as
(4), except that trade has been replaced by I 1 ,
I 2 , ..., I N . We want to rewrite this model in a
way that expresses the idea that trade is a noisy
measure of income-promoting interactions. To
do this, we define T *i 5 (b 1 I 1i 1 b 2 I 2i 1 ... 1
b N I Ni )/b, where b 5 Var(b 1 I 1 1 b 2 I 2 1 ... 1
b N I N )/Cov(b 1 I 1 1 b 2 I 2 1 ... 1 b N I N , T) and
where T is again trade. With this definition, we
can rewrite (14) as
(15) ln Y i 5 a 1 bT *i 1 cS i 1 e i .
It is straightforward to check that with these
definitions, T 2 T* is uncorrelated with T*.
Thus we can write
(16) T i 5 T *i 1 u i ,
where u i is uncorrelated with T *i . Thus, equa-
tions (15)–(16) express the idea that actual trade
is a noisy measure of income-promoting inter-
actions.
With this formulation, the relationship be-
tween income and actual trade is
19
We are grateful to an anonymous referee and several
seminar participants for suggesting this possibility.
394 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW
(17) ln Y i 5 a 1 bT i 1 cS i 1 ~e i 2 bu i !.
From (16), T and u are positively correlated. If
this correlation is strong enough, it will cause
the overall correlation between T and the resid-
ual in (17), e–bu, to be negative, and thus cause
OLS to yield a downward biased estimate of b.
And again this bias will not carry over to the IV
estimates—proximity and other geographic
variables are likely to be strongly correlated
with income-enhancing interactions, and there
is no evident reason for them to be correlated
with the idiosyncratic factors that cause trade to
move differently from those interactions.
In the univariate case, the expectation of
the OLS estimate of b would be given by
E[b̂ OLS] 5 (V T* /V T )b, where V T* and V T are
the variances of T* and T. When size is
controlled for, the expression is analogous:
V T*| S
(18) E@b̂ OLS# 5 b,
VT | S
where V T*|S and V T |S are the conditional vari-
ances of T* and T given size.
This discussion implies that trade must be a
very noisy proxy for income-promoting interac-
tions to account for the gap between the OLS and
IV estimates. In our baseline regression for the full
sample [columns (1) and (2) of Table 3], the OLS
estimate of b is less than half the IV estimate.
Thus for the gap between the two estimates to
arise from the fact that trade is an imperfect proxy
for income-enhancing interactions, the majority of
the variation in trade uncorrelated with size would
have to be uncorrelated with income-promoting
interactions. To put it differently, u in (16) would
have to have a standard deviation of 22 percentage
points.
We conclude that the most plausible expla-
nation of the bulk of the gap between the IV and
OLS estimates is simply sampling error. This
implies that our most important finding is not
that the IV estimates of trade’s effects exceed
the OLS estimates, but rather that there is no
evidence that the IV estimates are lower. In
addition, it implies that our IV estimates may be
substantially affected by sampling error, and
thus that the OLS estimates are likely to be
more accurate estimates of trade’s actual impact
on income.
JUNE 1999
III. Conclusion
This paper investigates the question of how
international trade affects standards of living.
Although this is an old question, it is a difficult
one to answer. The amounts that countries trade
are not determined exogenously. As a result,
correlations between trade and income cannot
identify the effect of trade.
This paper addresses this problem by focus-
ing on the component of trade that is due to
geographic factors. Some countries trade more
just because they are near well-populated coun-
tries, and some trade less because they are iso-
lated. Geographic factors are not a consequence
of income or government policy, and there is no
likely channel through which they affect in-
come other than through their impact on a coun-
try’s residents’ interactions with residents of
other countries and with one another. As a
result, the variation in trade that is due to geo-
graphic factors can serve as a natural experi-
ment for identifying the effects of trade.
The results of the experiment are consistent
across the samples and specifications we con-
sider: trade raises income. The relation be-
tween the geographic component of trade and
income suggests that a rise of one percentage
point in the ratio of trade to GDP increases
income per person by at least one-half per-
cent. Trade appears to raise income by spur-
ring the accumulation of physical and human
capital and by increasing output for given
levels of capital.
The results also suggest that within-country
trade raises income. Controlling for interna-
tional trade, countries that are larger—and that
therefore have more opportunities for trade
within their borders— have higher incomes. The
point estimates suggest that increasing a coun-
try’s size and area by one percent raises income
by one-tenth of a percent or more. And the
estimates suggest that within-country trade, like
international trade, raises income both through
capital accumulation and through income for
given levels of capital.
There are two important caveats to these con-
clusions. First, the effects are not estimated with
great precision. The hypotheses that the impacts
of trade and size are zero are typically only
marginally rejected at standard significance lev-
els. In addition, the hypothesis that the estimates
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH? 395

based on the geographic component of trade are
the same as the estimates based on overall trade
are typically relatively far from rejection. Thus,
although the results bolster the case for the
benefits of trade, they do not provide decisive
evidence for it.
This limitation is probably inherent in the ex-
periment we are considering. Once country size is
controlled for, geography appears to account for
only a moderate part of the variation in trade.
As a result, geographic variables provide only a
limited amount of information about the relation
between trade and income. Thus, unless additional
portions of overall trade that are unaffected by
other determinants of income can be identified, it
is likely to be difficult to improve greatly on our
estimates of the effects of trade.
The second limitation of the results is that
they cannot be applied without qualification to
the effects of trade policies. There are many
ways that trade affects income, and variations in
trade that are due to geography and variations
that are due to policy may not involve exactly
the same mix of the various mechanisms. Thus,
differences in trade resulting from policy may
not affect income in precisely the same way as
differences resulting from geography.
Nonetheless, our estimates of the effects of
geography-based differences in trade are at least
suggestive about the effects of policy-induced
differences. Our point estimates suggest that the
impact of geography-based differences in trade
are quantitatively large. We also find that the
estimated impact is larger than what one obtains
by naively using OLS, but is not significantly
different from the OLS estimate. These results
are not what one would expect if the positive
correlation between trade and income reflected
an impact of income on trade, or of omitted
factors on both variables. In that sense, our
results bolster the case for the importance of
trade and trade-promoting policies.

APPENDIX

TABLE A1—BASIC DATA

Area
Actual trade Constructed (thousands of Population Income per
Country share trade share square miles) (millions) worker
Algeria 49.66 13.97 919.595 4.859 13434
Angola 69.10 11.51 481.354 3.512 1742
Benin 76.99 42.20 43.483 1.874 2391
Botswana 121.28 24.03 231.800 0.370 6792
Burkina Faso 52.42 14.10 105.870 4.150 940
Burundi 30.82 24.86 10.747 2.539 986
Cameroon 57.67 15.79 183.569 3.831 3869
Cape Verde Islands 118.02 45.11 1.557 0.120 2829
Central African Republic 65.23 15.13 241.313 1.309 1266
Chad 61.43 12.00 495.755 1.791 1146
Comoros 67.06 46.77 0.863 0.181 1400
Congo 112.81 25.77 132.046 0.760 6878
Djibouti 117.06 70.97 8.958 0.105 4647
Egypt 51.97 11.75 386.900 12.719 7142
Ethiopia 34.13 8.44 472.432 18.385 705
Gabon 100.18 30.65 103.346 0.420 9672
Gambia 89.14 52.20 4.093 0.358 1609
Ghana 21.29 18.87 92.100 4.468 2237
Guinea 71.80 23.95 94.926 2.243 1583
Guinea-Bissau 62.74 42.24 13.948 0.425 1354
Ivory Coast 78.19 16.58 124.502 4.030 3740
Kenya 51.69 12.48 224.960 7.980 2014
Lesotho 152.42 20.66 11.720 0.743 2028
Liberia 79.63 29.81 43.000 0.811 2312
Madagascar 30.99 9.90 226.660 4.498 1707
Malawi 54.09 12.67 45.747 3.180 1171
Mali 73.60 12.80 482.077 2.332 1686
396 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW JUNE 1999

TABLE A1—Continued.

Area
Actual trade Constructed (thousands of Population Income per
Country share trade share square miles) (millions) worker
Mauritania 141.56 23.44 397.953 0.533 2674
Mauritius 109.10 31.11 0.787 0.577 7474
Morocco 58.50 12.71 172.413 6.714 6427
Mozambique 18.38 11.11 308.642 7.290 1417
Namibia 119.81 21.31 317.818 0.380 8465
Niger 51.27 12.37 489.206 3.343 1098
Nigeria 28.53 8.68 356.700 30.743 2874
Reunion 53.14 39.92 0.969 0.216 7858
Rwanda 30.65 26.20 10.169 3.005 1539
Senegal 70.63 19.87 75.954 2.758 2688
Seychelles 111.95 84.98 0.175 0.029 7058
Sierra Leone 19.15 27.81 27.700 1.372 2411
Somalia 25.64 14.89 246.199 2.774 1574
South Africa 55.43 8.90 471.440 11.240 9930
Sudan 21.34 10.97 967.491 7.121 2436
Swaziland 118.71 56.87 6.704 0.277 5225
Tanzania 21.03 10.97 364.900 10.266 975
Togo 105.52 41.47 21.925 1.277 1516
Tunisia 71.33 23.83 63.379 2.280 8783
Uganda 22.54 12.97 91.343 6.236 1224
Zaire 53.15 8.97 905.365 12.321 1136
Zambia 76.96 13.81 290.586 2.274 2399
Zimbabwe 56.40 11.27 150.699 3.135 3261
Bahamas 124.11 38.03 5.382 0.097 29815
Barbados 130.30 56.10 0.166 0.127 12212
Belize 183.27 87.48 8.866 0.049 8487
Canada 54.48 4.97 3851.809 12.595 31147
Costa Rica 63.19 23.37 19.652 0.920 9148
Dominica 103.09 75.08 0.305 0.030 6163
Dominican Republic 64.24 22.37 18.704 1.912 7082
El Salvador 52.21 28.91 8.260 1.564 5547
Grenada 120.63 81.25 0.133 0.039 4502
Guatemala 24.94 22.04 42.042 2.262 7358
Haiti 38.44 20.44 10.714 2.514 2125
Honduras 54.15 27.58 43.277 1.307 4652
Jamaica 131.89 22.19 4.411 1.059 4726
Mexico 25.74 4.52 761.600 24.669 17036
Nicaragua 36.60 23.46 50.180 0.980 5900
Panama 70.96 23.56 29.761 0.760 10039
Puerto Rico 136.74 22.75 3.515 1.101 21842
St. Lucia 165.77 68.83 0.238 0.057 5317
St. Vincent & Grenadines 152.17 79.41 0.150 0.042 5796
Trinidad & Tobago 61.90 30.33 1.980 0.441 25529
United States 18.01 2.56 3540.939 117.362 33783
Argentina 17.10 5.60 1072.067 10.798 14955
Bolivia 30.27 8.06 424.162 1.978 5623
Brazil 19.34 3.03 3286.470 49.609 10977
Chile 53.85 7.25 292.132 4.303 9768
Colombia 26.33 7.54 439.735 9.433 9276
Ecuador 47.63 11.42 109.484 2.820 9615
Guyana 109.95 25.92 83.000 0.280 3573
Paraguay 49.58 10.43 157.047 1.226 6241
Peru 39.42 7.03 496.222 6.107 8141
Suriname 82.99 30.96 63.251 0.124 10883
Uruguay 47.86 17.07 68.040 1.169 10216
Venezuela 40.76 8.94 352.143 5.789 18362
Bahrain 188.70 71.82 0.240 0.178 22840
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH? 397

TABLE A1—Continued.

Area
Actual trade Constructed (thousands of Population Income per
Country share trade share square miles) (millions) worker
Bangladesh 25.78 10.31 55.598 27.684 4265
Bhutan 62.54 37.74 17.954 0.575 1504
China 19.44 2.30 3689.631 612.363 2166
Hong Kong 209.52 35.88 0.398 3.516 16447
India 15.04 3.29 1229.737 295.478 2719
Indonesia 42.66 4.47 735.268 62.136 4332
Iran 15.20 10.06 636.293 13.540 13847
Iraq 49.22 19.14 169.235 4.105 15855
Israel 85.80 54.17 8.020 1.602 21953
Japan 25.54 5.47 143.574 75.526 18820
Jordan 113.50 68.18 37.297 0.601 15655
Korea, Republic of 67.86 14.36 38.031 16.608 10361
Kuwait 96.45 42.55 6.880 0.640 35065
Laos 13.80 27.32 91.429 1.758 2739
Malaysia 104.69 16.82 128.328 6.217 10458
Mongolia 82.72 13.52 604.829 0.894 3966
Myanmar 13.16 10.74 261.220 16.613 1332
Nepal 31.29 13.26 54.463 6.958 2244
Oman 87.06 34.19 82.030 0.368 31609
Pakistan 34.00 8.04 310.400 28.567 4249
Philippines 45.84 8.84 115.830 19.945 4229
Qatar 80.94 69.56 4.412 0.166 36646
Saudi Arabia 79.97 14.98 865.000 3.652 28180
Singapore 318.07 48.90 0.220 1.189 17986
Sri Lanka 62.93 13.94 25.332 5.786 5597
Syria 37.23 37.44 71.498 2.556 17166
Taiwan 94.62 17.92 13.895 8.262 12701
Thailand 51.20 9.45 198.455 26.793 4751
United Arab Emirates 89.66 33.42 32.000 0.694 38190
Yemen 49.34 16.83 128.560 2.369 6425
Austria 81.27 36.64 32.375 3.528 23837
Belgium 151.34 52.46 11.781 4.071 27325
Bulgaria 85.99 31.12 42.823 4.417 9662
Cyprus 107.57 54.39 3.572 0.310 13918
Czechoslovakia 69.45 21.07 49.383 8.137 7467
Denmark 72.99 30.89 16.631 2.780 23861
Finland 57.50 21.64 130.119 2.493 23700
France 47.17 15.26 211.208 24.882 27064
Germany, West 61.52 18.47 96.010 28.085 27252
Greece 53.97 27.01 50.961 3.800 16270
Hungary 82.32 26.92 35.920 5.195 10827
Iceland 81.83 33.08 39.709 0.127 23256
Ireland 118.84 33.85 26.600 1.342 19197
Italy 46.06 13.97 116.500 22.714 27189
Luxembourg 211.94 281.29 0.999 0.157 30782
Malta 160.86 98.14 0.122 0.119 15380
Netherlands 118.76 35.84 16.041 5.855 28563
Norway 86.00 23.54 125.049 2.043 28749
Poland 35.07 13.84 120.728 19.235 8079
Portugal 77.95 18.78 35.550 4.540 11343
Romania 41.62 18.80 91.699 11.275 4021
Spain 43.51 12.38 194.885 13.732 21169
Sweden 69.02 18.22 173.800 4.238 26504
Switzerland 77.69 32.57 15.941 3.222 29848
Turkey 44.40 11.26 300.947 21.829 7091
United Kingdom 56.87 13.47 94.247 27.684 22981
Soviet Union 18.28 3.68 8600.387 142.801 13700
398 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW JUNE 1999

TABLE A1—Continued.

Area
Actual trade Constructed (thousands of Population Income per
Country share trade share square miles) (millions) worker
Yugoslavia 57.88 25.82 39.449 10.475 11417
Australia 35.28 4.07 2966.150 7.391 28960
Fiji 89.13 18.56 7.078 0.232 9840
New Zealand 65.25 8.19 103.884 1.438 26039
Papua New Guinea 94.52 10.17 178.704 1.660 3374
Solomon Islands 123.60 25.12 10.954 0.088 5109
Tonga 102.25 43.40 0.288 0.030 6022
Vanuatu 123.33 30.86 4.707 0.042 5707
Western Samoa 92.17 32.77 1.093 0.050 5388

Notes: Actual trade share—Ratio of imports plus exports to GDP, 1985 (Penn World Table, Mark 5.6, Series OPEN).
Constructed trade share—Aggregated fitted values of bilateral trade equation with geographic variables. (See text, Section
I, subsections B–D.)
Area—Rand McNally (1993).
Population—Economically active population, 1985 (Penn World Table, Mark 5.6, constructed from real GDP per capita
(RGDPCH), real GDP per worker (RGDPW), and total population (POP): RGDPCH*POP/RGDPW).
Income per worker—Real GDP per worker, 1985; 1985 international prices (dollars) (Penn World Table, Mark 5.6, Series
RGDPCH).

REFERENCES University of Chicago Press, 1995, pp. 13–49.

Bradford, Colin, Jr. and Chakwin, Naomi. “Al-
ternative Explanations of the Trade-Output
Correlation in East Asian Economies.”
OECD Development Centre Technical Paper
No. 87, August 1993.
De Long, J. Bradford and Summers, Lawrence H.
“Equipment Investment and Economic
Growth.” Quarterly Journal of Economics,
May 1991, 106(2), pp. 445–502.
Dollar, David. “Outward-Oriented Developing
Economies Really Do Grow More Rapidly:
Evidence from 95 LDCs, 1976 –1985.” Eco-
nomic Development and Cultural Change,
April 1992, 40(3), pp. 523– 44.
Easterly, William. “How Much Do Distortions
Affect Growth?” Journal of Monetary Eco-
nomics, November 1993, 32(2), pp. 187–212.
Edwards, Sebastian. “Openness, Trade Liberal-
ization, and Growth in Developing Coun-
tries.” Journal of Economic Literature,
September 1993, 31(3), pp. 1358 –93.
. “Trade Policy, Exchange Rates, and
Growth,” in Rudiger Dornbusch and Sebastian
Edwards, eds., Reform, recovery, and growth:
Latin America and the Middle East. Chicago:
Feder, Gershon. “On Exports and Economic
Growth.” Journal of Development Econom-
ics, February–April 1983, 12(1–2), pp. 59 –
73.
Fischer, Stanley. “Growth, Macroeconomics,
and Development,” in Olivier Jean Blanchard
and Stanley Fischer, eds., NBER macroeco-
nomics annual 1991. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press, 1991, pp. 329 – 64.
. “The Role of Macroeconomic Factors
in Growth.” Journal of Monetary Economics,
December 1993, 32(3), pp. 485–512.
Frankel, Jeffrey A. Regional trading blocs in the
world trading system. Washington, DC: In-
stitute of International Economics, 1997.
Frankel, Jeffrey A. and Romer, David. “Trade
and Growth: An Empirical Investigation.”
National Bureau of Economic Research
(Cambridge, MA) Working Paper No. 5476,
March 1996.
Frankel, Jeffrey A.; Romer, David and Cyrus,
Teresa L. “Trade and Growth in East Asian
Countries: Cause and Effect?” National
Bureau of Economic Research Working Pa-
per (Cambridge, MA) No. 5732, August
1996.
VOL. 89 NO. 3 FRANKEL AND ROMER: DOES TRADE CAUSE GROWTH?
Frankel, Jeffrey A.; Stein, Ernesto and Wei,
Shang-jin. “Trading Blocs and the Americas:
The Natural, the Unnatural, and the Super-
natural.” Journal of Development Economics,
June 1995, 47(1), pp. 61–95.
Hall, Alastair R.; Rudebusch, Glenn D. and Wil-
cox, David W. “Judging Instrument Relevance
in Instrumental Variables Estimation.” Inter-
national Economic Review, May 1996, 37(2),
pp. 283–98.
Hall, Robert E. and Jones, Charles I. “Why Do
Some Countries Produce So Much More Out-
put per Worker than Others?” Quarterly Jour-
nal of Economics, February 1999, 114(1), pp.
83–116.
Harrison, Ann. “Openness and Growth: A Time-
Series, Cross-Country Analysis for Develop-
ing Countries.” Journal of Development
Economics, March 1996, 48(2), pp. 419 – 47.
Hausman, Jerry A. “Specification Tests in
Econometrics.” Econometrica, November
1978, 46(6), pp. 1251–71.
Helpman, Elhanan. “Growth, Technological
Progress, and Trade.” National Bureau of
Economic Research (Cambridge, MA) Re-
print No. 1145, 1988.
Klenow, Peter and Rodriguez-Clare, Andrés.
“The Neoclassical Revival in Growth Eco-
nomics: Has It Gone Too Far?” in Ben S.
Bernanke and Julio J. Rotemberg, eds.,
NBER macroeconomics annual 1997. Cam-
bridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997, pp. 73–103.
Kormendi, Roger C. and Meguire, Philip G. “Macro-
economic Determinants of Growth: Cross-Coun-
try Evidence.” Journal of Monetary Economics,
September 1985, 16(2), pp. 141–63.
Lee, Jong-Wha. “International Trade, Distor-
tions and Long-Run Economic Growth.” IMF
Staff Papers, June 1993, 40(2), pp. 299 –328.
Levine, Ross and Renelt, David. “A Sensitivity
Analysis of Cross-Country Growth Regres-
sions.” American Economic Review, Septem-
ber 1992, 82(4), pp. 942– 63.
Linneman, Hans. An econometric study of inter-
399
national trade flows. Amsterdam: North-
Holland, 1966.
Mankiw, N. Gregory; Romer, David and Weil,
David N. “A Contribution to the Empirics of
Economic Growth.” Quarterly Journal of
Economics, May 1992, 107(2), pp. 407–37.
Michaely, Michael. “Exports and Growth: An
Empirical Investigation.” Journal of Devel-
opment Economics, March 1977, 4(1), pp.
49 –53.
Nelson, Charles R. and Startz, Richard. “Some
Further Results on the Exact Small Sample
Properties of the Instrumental Variable Esti-
mator.” Econometrica, July 1990, 58(4), pp.
967–76.
Rand McNally. Quick reference world atlas.
Chicago: Rand McNally, 1993.
Rodrik, Dani. “Getting Interventions Right:
How South Korea and Taiwan Grew Rich.”
Economic Policy, April 1995a, (20), pp.
53–97.
. “Trade and Industrial Policy Re-
form,”in Jere Behrman and T. N. Srinivasan,
eds., Handbook of development economics,
Vol. 3B. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1995b,
pp. 2925– 82.
Sachs, Jeffrey D. and Warner, Andrew. “Eco-
nomic Reform and the Process of Global
Integration.” Brookings Papers on Economic
Activity, 1995, (1), pp. 1–95.
Sala-i-Martin, Xavier. “Comment,” in Olivier
Jean Blanchard and Stanley Fischer, eds.,
NBER macroeconomics annual 1991. Cam-
bridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991, pp. 368 –
78.
Staiger, Douglas and Stock, James H. “Instru-
mental Variables Regression with Weak In-
struments.” Econometrica, May 1997, 65(3),
pp. 557– 86.
Summers, Robert and Heston, Alan. “The Penn
World Table (Mark 5): An Expanded Set of
International Comparisons, 1950 –1988.”
Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1991,
106(2), pp. 327– 68.
This article has been cited by:

1. Ping Yu, Peter C.B. Phillips. 2018. Threshold regression with endogeneity. Journal of Econometrics
203:1, 50-68. [Crossref]
2. Swati Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano, Veronica Rappoport, Thomas Sampson, Catherine Thomas.
2018. UK trade and FDI: A post-Brexit perspective. Papers in Regional Science 97:1, 9-24. [Crossref]
3. Antonia Reinecke, Hans-Jörg Schmerer. 2018. Redistribution, trade and corruption: an empirical
assessment. Applied Economics 45, 1-15. [Crossref]
4. Idowu Opeoluwa Isreal Akingba, Shivee Ranjanee Kaliappan, Hanny Zurina Hamzah. 2018. Impact of
health capital on economic growth in Singapore: an ARDL approach to cointegration. International
Journal of Social Economics 45:2, 340-356. [Crossref]
5. Yolanda Ubago Martínez, Pedro Pascual Arzoz, Belén Iráizoz Apezteguía. 2018. Does decentralization
contribute to efficiency? Evidence from OECD countries. Applied Economics 50:7, 726-742. [Crossref]
6. Robert Mullings, Aruneema Mahabir. 2018. Growth by Destination: The Role of Trade in Africa’s
Recent Growth Episode. World Development 102, 243-261. [Crossref]
7. Boying Li, Yu Hao, Chun-Ping Chang. 2018. Does an anticorruption campaign deteriorate
environmental quality? Evidence from China. Energy & Environment 29:1, 67-94. [Crossref]
8. Joanna Wolszczak-Derlacz, Aleksandra Parteka. 2018. The effects of offshoring to low-wage countries
on domestic wages: a worldwide industrial analysis. Empirica 45:1, 129-163. [Crossref]
9. Ivan Etzo, Sumiko Takaoka. 2018. The impact of migration on the cross-border M&A: Some
evidence for Japan. The World Economy 87. . [Crossref]
10. Dany Bahar, Hillel Rapoport. 2018. Migration, Knowledge Diffusion and the Comparative Advantage
of Nations. The Economic Journal 89. . [Crossref]
11. Muhammad Hafeez, Yuan Chunhui, David Strohmaier, Manzoor Ahmed, Liu Jie. 2018. Does
finance affect environmental degradation: evidence from One Belt and One Road Initiative region?.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2015. . [Crossref]
12. Hugo Jales, Thomas H. Kang, Guilherme Stein, Felipe Garcia Ribeiro. 2018. Measuring the role of
the 1959 revolution on Cuba's economic performance. The World Economy 105. . [Crossref]
13. Nahla Samargandi. 2018. Determinants of Labour Productivity in MENA Countries. Emerging
Markets Finance and Trade 1. . [Crossref]
14. Daniel Lederman, Raymond Robertson. 2018. Economic integration across Latin America: Evidence
from labour markets, 1990-2013. The World Economy 23. . [Crossref]
15. Dramane Coulibaly, Blaise Gnimassoun, Valérie Mignon. 2018. Growth-enhancing Effect of
Openness to Trade and Migrations: What is the Effective Transmission Channel for Africa?. Journal
of African Economies . [Crossref]
16. José M. Ramírez-Hurtado, Juan M. Berbel-Pineda, Beatriz Palacios-Florencio. 2018. Study of the
influence of socio-economic factors in the international expansion of Spanish franchisors to Latin
American countries. PLOS ONE 13:1, e0190391. [Crossref]
17. Michel Beine, Serge Coulombe. 2018. Immigration and internal mobility in Canada. Journal of
Population Economics 31:1, 69-106. [Crossref]
18. Nisha Bellinger. 99. [Crossref]
19. Syed F. Mahmud, Davron Ishnazorov. 415. [Crossref]
20. Ali Ari, Raif Cergibozan. 435. [Crossref]
21. César Calderón, Megumi Kubota. 2018. Does higher openness cause more real exchange rate
volatility?. Journal of International Economics 110, 176-204. [Crossref]
22. Konstantinos Konstantaras, Dionisis Philippas, Costas Siriopoulos. 2018. Trade asymmetries in the
Mediterranean basin. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries . [Crossref]
23. Marilyne Huchet-Bourdon, Chantal Le Mouël, Mariana Vijil. 2018. The relationship between trade
openness and economic growth: Some new insights on the openness measurement issue. The World
Economy 41:1, 59-76. [Crossref]
24. Vinh Q. T. Dang, Yu Alan Yang, Kenneth S. Chan. 2018. Yen or Yuan? The law of one price and
economic integration in Asia. The World Economy 41:1, 171-193. [Crossref]
25. Yu Hao, Hui Peng, T. Temulun, Li-Qun Liu, Jie Mao, Zhi-Nan Lu, Hao Chen. 2018. How harmful
is air pollution to economic development? New evidence from PM 2.5 concentrations of Chinese cities.
Journal of Cleaner Production 172, 743-757. [Crossref]
26. Sokchea Lim, AKM Mahbub Morshed, Channary Khun. 2018. Trust and macroeconomic
performance: A two-step approach. Economic Modelling 68, 293-305. [Crossref]
27. Joshua Aizenman. Emerging Markets 3604-3607. [Crossref]
28. Qian Dang, Megan Konar. 2018. Trade Openness and Domestic Water Use. Water Resources Research
54:1, 4-18. [Crossref]
29. Bo Jiang, Gary LaFree. 2017. Social Control, Trade Openness and Human Trafficking. Journal of
Quantitative Criminology 33:4, 887-913. [Crossref]
30. Cristina Cattaneo, Valentina Bosetti. 2017. Climate-induced International Migration and Conflicts.
CESifo Economic Studies 63:4, 500-528. [Crossref]
31. Roberto Ezcurra, Beatriz Manotas. 2017. Is there a link between globalisation and civil conflict?. The
World Economy 40:12, 2592-2610. [Crossref]
32. Dominik Boddin, Horst Raff, Natalia Trofimenko. 2017. Foreign ownership and the export and
import propensities of developing-country firms. The World Economy 40:12, 2543-2563. [Crossref]
33. Burçak Polat, Antonio Rodríguez Andrés. 2017. Trade openness, labour market rigidity and economic
growth: A dynamic panel data analysis. The Economic and Labour Relations Review 28:4, 555-564.
[Crossref]
34. Alexander Quaicoe, Anthony Q.Q. Aboagye, Godfred A. Bokpin. 2017. Assessing the impact of export
processing zones on economic growth in Ghana. Research in International Business and Finance 42,
1150-1163. [Crossref]
35. Rong Guan, Haitao Zheng, Jie Hu, Qi Fang, Ruoen Ren. 2017. The Higher Carbon Intensity
of Loans, the Higher Non-Performing Loan Ratio: The Case of China. Sustainability 9:12, 667.
[Crossref]
36. Thi Nguyet Anh Nguyen, Thi Hong Hanh Pham, Thomas Vallée. 2017. Similarity in trade structure:
Evidence from ASEAN + 3. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 26:8,
1000-1024. [Crossref]
37. Mariacristina Piva, Massimiliano Tani, Marco Vivarelli. 2017. Business visits, knowledge diffusion
and productivity. Journal of Population Economics 43. . [Crossref]
38. . Globalization 1-50. [Crossref]
39. Joanicjusz Nazarko, Katarzyna Czerewacz-Filipowicz, Katarzyna Anna Kuźmicz. 2017. Comparative
analysis of the Eastern European countries as participants of the new silk road. Journal of Business
Economics and Management 18:6, 1212-1227. [Crossref]
40. JaeBin Ahn, Romain Duval. 2017. Trading with China: Productivity gains, job losses. Economics
Letters 160, 38-42. [Crossref]
41. Chi-Chuan Lee, Chien-Chiang Lee, Yan-Yu Chiou. 2017. Insurance activities, globalization, and
economic growth: New methods, new evidence. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions
and Money 51, 155-170. [Crossref]
42. Andrea Boltho, Wendy Carlin, Pasquale Scaramozzino. 2017. Why East Germany did not become a
new Mezzogiorno. Journal of Comparative Economics . [Crossref]
43. Yaping He, Pengfei Sheng, Marek Vochozka. 2017. Pollution caused by finance and the relative policy
analysis in China. Energy & Environment 28:7, 808-823. [Crossref]
44. Fabio Mazzola, Iolanda Lo Cascio, Rosalia Epifanio, Giuseppe Di Giacomo. 2017. Territorial capital
and growth over the Great Recession: a local analysis for Italy. The Annals of Regional Science 24. .
[Crossref]
45. José-Daniel Reyes. Effects of FDI on High-Growth Firms in Developing Countries 51-72. [Crossref]
46. Daniel Lederman, Justin T. Lesniak. Open and Nimble: How Small Economies Adapt to Their
Economic Challenges 77-92. [Crossref]
47. Jean-Pierre Chauffour. Morocco in 2040 93-127. [Crossref]
48. Giray Gozgor. 2017. The Impact of Globalization on the Structural Unemployment: An Empirical
Reappraisal. International Economic Journal 31:4, 471-489. [Crossref]
49. Swati Dhingra, Hanwei Huang, Gianmarco Ottaviano, João Paulo Pessoa, Thomas Sampson, John
Van Reenen. 2017. The costs and benefits of leaving the EU: trade effects. Economic Policy 32:92,
651-705. [Crossref]
50. Sena Kimm Gnangnon. 2017. The Impact of Multilateral Trade Liberalisation on Economic
Development: Some Empirical Evidence. Economic Affairs 37:3, 397-410. [Crossref]
51. Xiaoping Chen, Yuchen Shao. 2017. Trade policies for a small open economy: The case of Singapore.
The World Economy 108. . [Crossref]
52. Ishmael Ackah. 2017. Does bad company corrupt good character? A spatial econometric analysis of
oil resource management in Africa. International Journal of Energy Sector Management 11:3, 480-502.
[Crossref]
53. Jacob Hochard, Edward Barbier. 2017. Market Accessibility and Economic Growth: Insights from a
New Dimension of Inequality. World Development 97, 279-297. [Crossref]
54. Muhammad Tariq Iqbal Khan, Muhammad Rizwan Yaseen, Qamar Ali. 2017. Dynamic relationship
between financial development, energy consumption, trade and greenhouse gas: Comparison of upper
middle income countries from Asia, Europe, Africa and America. Journal of Cleaner Production 161,
567-580. [Crossref]
55. Luigi Pascali. 2017. The Wind of Change: Maritime Technology, Trade, and Economic Development.
American Economic Review 107:9, 2821-2854. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
56. Thomas Barnebeck Andersen, Jeanet Bentzen, Carl-Johan Dalgaard, Paul Sharp. 2017. Pre-
reformation Roots of the Protestant Ethic. The Economic Journal 127:604, 1756-1793. [Crossref]
57. Fabrizio Carmignani, Parvinder Kler. 2017. Your war, my problem: How conflict in a neighbour
country hurts domestic development. Economic Modelling . [Crossref]
58. P. Owen. 2017. Evaluating Ingenious Instruments for Fundamental Determinants of Long-Run
Economic Growth and Development. Econometrics 5:3, 38. [Crossref]
59. Ismael Issifou. 2017. Can migration reduce civil conflicts as an antidote to rent-seeking?. Economic
Systems 41:3, 333-353. [Crossref]
60. Faqin Lin. 2017. Trade openness and air pollution: City-level empirical evidence from China. China
Economic Review 45, 78-88. [Crossref]
61. Federico Etro. 2017. Research in economics and macroeconomics. Research in Economics 71:3,
373-383. [Crossref]
62. Wajahat Ali, Azrai Abdullah, Muhammad Azam. 2017. Re-visiting the environmental Kuznets
curve hypothesis for Malaysia: Fresh evidence from ARDL bounds testing approach. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 77, 990-1000. [Crossref]
63. Oueslati Tayssir, Ouerghi Feryel. 2017. Does central banking promote financial development?. Borsa
Istanbul Review . [Crossref]
64. Lu Liu, Chong Zhou, Junbing Huang, Yu Hao. 2017. The Impact of Financial Development on
Energy Demand: Evidence from China. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 37. . [Crossref]
65. Caleb Stroup, Ben Zissimos. 2017. Pampered Bureaucracy, Political Stability and Trade Integration.
Review of Development Economics 21:3, 425-450. [Crossref]
66. Cesare Fracassi. 2017. Corporate Finance Policies and Social Networks. Management Science 63:8,
2420-2438. [Crossref]
67. Sokchea Lim, Hem C. Basnet. 2017. International Migration, Workers’ Remittances and Permanent
Income Hypothesis. World Development 96, 438-450. [Crossref]
68. George E. Halkos, Michael L. Polemis. 2017. Does Financial Development Affect Environmental
Degradation? Evidence from the OECD Countries. Business Strategy and the Environment 188. .
[Crossref]
69. Marina Murat. 2017. Foreign education and international trade: empirical evidence from selected
Latin American countries. International Review of Applied Economics 83, 1-20. [Crossref]
70. Gibran Cruz-Martinez. 2017. Revenue-Generating Potential of Taxation for Older-Age Social
Pensions. Ageing International 49. . [Crossref]
71. Phouphet Kyophilavong, Michael C. S. Wong, Somchith Souksavath, Bin Xiong. 2017. Impacts of
trade liberalization with China and Chinese FDI on Laos: evidence from the CGE model. Journal of
Chinese Economic and Business Studies 19, 1-14. [Crossref]
72. Wolfgang Maennig, Christopher Vierhaus. 2017. Winning the Olympic host city election: key success
factors. Applied Economics 49:31, 3086-3099. [Crossref]
73. Cem Işik, Evangelia Kasımatı, Serdar Ongan. 2017. Analyzing the causalities between economic
growth, financial development, international trade, tourism expenditure and/on the CO 2 emissions
in Greece. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy 12:7, 665-673. [Crossref]
74. Alassane Drabo. 2017. Climate change mitigation and agricultural development models: Primary
commodity exports or local consumption production?. Ecological Economics 137, 110-125. [Crossref]
75. Harald Badinger, Peter Egger. 2017. Spacey Parents and Spacey Hosts in Foreign Direct Investment.
Economica 84:335, 480-497. [Crossref]
76. John W. McArthur, Gordon C. McCord. 2017. Fertilizing growth: Agricultural inputs and their
effects in economic development. Journal of Development Economics 127, 133-152. [Crossref]
77. Christopher Bowdler, Adeel Malik. 2017. Openness and inflation volatility: Panel data evidence. The
North American Journal of Economics and Finance 41, 57-69. [Crossref]
78. Nesrin Ozatac, Korhan K. Gokmenoglu, Nigar Taspinar. 2017. Testing the EKC hypothesis
by considering trade openness, urbanization, and financial development: the case of Turkey.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research 24:20, 16690-16701. [Crossref]
79. Linyue Li. 2017. The impact of intra-industry trade on business cycle synchronization in East Asia.
China Economic Review . [Crossref]
80. David M. Gould, Georgi Panterov. 2017. Multidimensional connectivity: Why the interplay of
international connections matters for knowledge transfers. Journal of Policy Modeling 39:4, 699-711.
[Crossref]
81. Alexander Bilson Darku, Richard Yeboah. 2017. Economic openness and income growth in developing
countries: a regional comparative analysis. Applied Economics 14, 1-15. [Crossref]
82. Jérôme Valette. 2017. Do Migrants Transfer Productive Knowledge Back to Their Origin Countries?.
The Journal of Development Studies 115, 1-20. [Crossref]
83. Michael Jetter. 2017. The Impact of Exports on Economic Growth: It's the Market Form. The World
Economy 40:6, 1040-1052. [Crossref]
84. Jason Qu, Ric Simes, John O'Mahony. 2017. How Do Digital Technologies Drive Economic Growth?.
Economic Record 93, 57-69. [Crossref]
85. Kevin Zheng Zhou, Gerald Yong Gao, Hongxin Zhao. 2017. State Ownership and Firm Innovation
in China: An Integrated View of Institutional and Efficiency Logics. Administrative Science Quarterly
62:2, 375-404. [Crossref]
86. Thierry Baudassé, Rémi Bazillier, Ismaël Issifou. 2017. MIGRATION AND INSTITUTIONS:
EXIT AND VOICE (FROM ABROAD)?. Journal of Economic Surveys 40. . [Crossref]
87. Nita Rudra, Jennifer Tobin. 2017. When Does Globalization Help the Poor?. Annual Review of Political
Science 20:1, 287-307. [Crossref]
88. Catia Cialani. 2017. CO 2 emissions, GDP and trade: a panel cointegration approach. International
Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 24:3, 193-204. [Crossref]
89. Thanti Mthanti, Kalu Ojah. 2017. Entrepreneurial orientation (EO): Measurement and policy
implications of entrepreneurship at the macroeconomic level. Research Policy 46:4, 724-739. [Crossref]
90. Xuehui Han, Shang-Jin Wei. 2017. Re-examining the middle-income trap hypothesis (MITH): What
to reject and what to revive?. Journal of International Money and Finance 73, 41-61. [Crossref]
91. Victor Ginsburgh, Jacques Melitz, Farid Toubal. 2017. Foreign Language Learning and Trade. Review
of International Economics 25:2, 320-361. [Crossref]
92. Emily J. Blanchard, William W. Olney. 2017. Globalization and human capital investment: Export
composition drives educational attainment. Journal of International Economics 106, 165-183. [Crossref]
93. Carlo Gianelle, Letizia Montinari, Simone Salotti. 2017. Interregional Trade, Specialization, and
the Business Cycle: Policy Implications for the EMU. Journal of Business Cycle Research 13:1, 1-27.
[Crossref]
94. Faqin Lin, Dongzhou Mei, Huanhuan Wang, Xi Yao. 2017. Romer was right on openness and
inflation: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Applied Economics 20:1, 121-140. [Crossref]
95. Tong Xin, Wu Yuming, Li Xuesen, Tong Lin. An empirical study on spatial spillover of carbon
emissions and financial development based on provinces data and spatial panel econometrics model
3897-3902. [Crossref]
96. Amy Pond. 2017. Economic Sanctions and Demand for Protection. Journal of Conflict Resolution 61:5,
1073-1094. [Crossref]
97. Rikhil R. Bhavnani, Bethany Lacina. 2017. Fiscal Federalism at Work? Central Responses to Internal
Migration in India. World Development 93, 236-248. [Crossref]
98. Qingliang Fan, Wei Zhong. 2017. Nonparametric Additive Instrumental Variable Estimator: A Group
Shrinkage Estimation Perspective. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 69, 1-12. [Crossref]
99. Mingming Feng, Tony Kang, Sandeep Nabar. 2017. National societal values and corporate governance.
International Journal of Emerging Markets 12:2, 183-198. [Crossref]
100. Magda Kandil, Muhammad Shahbaz, Mantu Kumar Mahalik, Duc Khuong Nguyen. 2017. The
drivers of economic growth in China and India: globalization or financial development?. International
Journal of Development Issues 16:1, 54-84. [Crossref]
101. Luis Villanueva. 2017. Are manufacturing workers benefiting from trade? The case of Mexico’s
manufacturing sector. International Journal of Development Issues 16:1, 25-42. [Crossref]
102. Rao Muhammad Atif, Liu Haiyun, Haider Mahmood. 2017. Pakistan's agricultural exports,
determinants and its potential: an application of stochastic frontier gravity model. The Journal of
International Trade & Economic Development 26:3, 257-276. [Crossref]
103. J. Mikael Malmaeus, Eva C. Alfredsson. 2017. Potential Consequences on the Economy of Low or
No Growth - Short and Long Term Perspectives. Ecological Economics 134, 57-64. [Crossref]
104. T. Gries, R. Grundmann, I. Palnau, M. Redlin. 2017. Innovations, growth and participation in
advanced economies - a review of major concepts and findings. International Economics and Economic
Policy 14:2, 293-351. [Crossref]
105. Dawood Mamoon, S. Mansoob Murshed. 2017. When Education Explains Strong Institutions: Trade
Policy also Matters. Social Indicators Research 131:3, 1179-1210. [Crossref]
106. Bengt Söderlund, Patrik Gustavsson Tingvall. 2017. Capital Freedom, Financial Development and
Provincial Economic Growth in China. The World Economy 40:4, 764-787. [Crossref]
107. Joshua Sunday Riti, Yang Shu, Deyong Song, Miriam Kamah. 2017. The contribution of energy
use and financial development by source in climate change mitigation process: A global empirical
perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production 148, 882-894. [Crossref]
108. Mehdi Abid. 2017. Estimating the Size of the Informal Trade Across the World: Evidence from a
MIMIC Approach. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 184. . [Crossref]
109. Maha Kalai, Nahed Zghidi. 2017. Foreign Direct Investment, Trade, and Economic Growth in MENA
Countries: Empirical Analysis Using ARDL Bounds Testing Approach. Journal of the Knowledge
Economy 72. . [Crossref]
110. Maoliang Bu, Chin-Te Lin, Bing Zhang. Globalization and Climate Change: New Empirical Panel
Data Evidence 201-220. [Crossref]
111. Christian Volpe Martincus, Jerónimo Carballo, Ana Cusolito. 2017. Roads, exports and employment:
Evidence from a developing country. Journal of Development Economics 125, 21-39. [Crossref]
112. Michael Binder, Marcel Bluhm. 2017. On the conditional effects of IMF program participation on
output growth. Journal of Macroeconomics 51, 192-214. [Crossref]
113. Paolo Di Caro. 2017. Testing and explaining economic resilience with an application to Italian regions.
Papers in Regional Science 96:1, 93-113. [Crossref]
114. Seçil Hülya Danakol, Saul Estrin, Paul Reynolds, Utz Weitzel. 2017. Foreign direct investment via
M&A and domestic entrepreneurship: blessing or curse?. Small Business Economics 48:3, 599-612.
[Crossref]
115. Luis C. Corchon. 2017. Trade and growth: A simple model with not-so-simple implications. Journal
of Dynamics and Games 4:2, 175-190. [Crossref]
116. Chad P. Brown, Daniel Lederman, Samuel Pienknagura, Raymond Robertson. In Search of Growth
and Stability through Factor Market Integration 151-178. [Crossref]
117. Chad P. Brown, Daniel Lederman, Samuel Pienknagura, Raymond Robertson. Economic Performance
and Geography: Rising and Falling with Our Neighbors 19-41. [Crossref]
118. Federico S. Mandelman, Andrei Zlate. 2017. Economic aspects of international labour migration.
International Finance 20:1, 100-112. [Crossref]
119. Xiaobing Zhao, Ding Du. 2017. Economic costs of aggressive climate policy. Energy Sources, Part B:
Economics, Planning, and Policy 464, 1-6. [Crossref]
120. Dong-Hyeon Kim, Shu-Chin Lin. 2017. Natural Resources and Economic Development: New Panel
Evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics 66:2, 363-391. [Crossref]
121. Ghulam Mustafa, Marian Rizov, David Kernohan. 2017. Growth, human development, and trade:
The Asian experience. Economic Modelling 61, 93-101. [Crossref]
122. Salih Turan Katircioğlu, Nigar Taşpinar. 2017. Testing the moderating role of financial development
in an environmental Kuznets curve: Empirical evidence from Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 68, 572-586. [Crossref]
123. Michael A. Allen. 2017. The Influence of Regional Power Distributions on Interdependence. Journal
of Conflict Resolution 69, 002200271666980. [Crossref]
124. Mahyudin Ahmad, Stephen G. Hall. 2017. Trust-based social capital, economic growth and property
rights: explaining the relationship. International Journal of Social Economics 44:1, 21-52. [Crossref]
125. Guanghua Wan, Dan Yang, Yuan Zhang. 2017. Why Asia and China have lower urban concentration
and urban primacy. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy 22:1, 90-105. [Crossref]
126. Mohammed Shuaibu. 2017. The Effect of Trade Liberalisation on Poverty in Nigeria: A Micro–
Macro Framework. International Economic Journal 31:1, 68-93. [Crossref]
127. John Joshua. International Trade Relations 99-130. [Crossref]
128. Conor Walsh, Sarah Mander. 2017. Contextualising the drivers for trade: Some lessons from historical
case studies. Marine Policy 75, 290-299. [Crossref]
129. Philippe Aghion, Agnès Festré. 2017. Schumpeterian growth theory, Schumpeter, and growth policy
design. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 27:1, 25-42. [Crossref]
130. Chunlai Chen, Yan Wu. 2017. Impact of Foreign Direct Investment and Export on Urbanization:
Evidence from China. China & World Economy 25:1, 71-89. [Crossref]
131. Vincenzo Bove, Leandro Elia. 2017. Migration, Diversity, and Economic Growth. World Development
89, 227-239. [Crossref]
132. Francesca Romana Medda, Francesco Caravelli, Simone Caschili, Alan Wilson. Enhancing Trade in
Sea- and Land-Locked Countries 3-10. [Crossref]
133. Ali Ari, Raif Cergibozan. Sustainable Growth in Turkey: The Role of Trade Openness, Financial
Development, and Renewable Energy Use 1-21. [Crossref]
134. Bernard Njindan Iyke. 2017. Does Trade Openness Matter for Economic Growth in the CEE
Countries?. Review of Economic Perspectives 17:1. . [Crossref]
135. Syed F. Mahmud, Davron Ishnazorov. Trade-Growth Nexus and Industrial Policy 1-19. [Crossref]
136. Manamba Epaphra, Ales H. Mwakalasya. 2017. Analysis of Foreign Direct Investment, Agricultural
Sector and Economic Growth in Tanzania. Modern Economy 08:01, 111-140. [Crossref]
137. Micah Samuel Gaalya, Bbaale Edward, Hisali Eria. 2017. Trade Openness and Tax Revenue
Performance in East African Countries. Modern Economy 08:05, 690-711. [Crossref]
138. Dean Coldicott. Globalization and Global Trade 1-9. [Crossref]
139. Yaya Keho, Miao Grace Wang. 2017. The impact of trade openness on economic growth: The case
of Cote d’Ivoire. Cogent Economics & Finance 5:1, 1332820. [Crossref]
140. Kin-Boon Tang, Diya Bundhoo. 2017. Foreign Aid and Economic Growth in Developing Countries:
Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Theoretical Economics Letters 07:05, 1473. [Crossref]
141. Philip B. Whyman, Alina I. Petrescu. 77. [Crossref]
142. Philip B. Whyman, Alina I. Petrescu. Economic Growth and Productivity 227-256. [Crossref]
143. Vítor João Pereira Domingues Martinho. 1. [Crossref]
144. CHUNLAI CHEN, YAN WU. 2017. INTERREGIONAL IMPACT OF FOREIGN DIRECT
INVESTMENT ON CHINA’S INLAND URBANIZATION. The Singapore Economic Review 1.
[Crossref]
145. Łukasz Hardt. Causal Explanations in Economics 99-132. [Crossref]
146. Nicholas Crafts. UK Economic Growth Performance in a European Context: Has EU Membership
Made Much Difference? 9-45. [Crossref]
147. International Monetary Fund.. 2017. Cluster Report: Trade Integration in Latin America and the
Caribbean. IMF Staff Country Reports 17:66, 1. [Crossref]
148. Muhammad Shahbaz, Samia Nasreen, Khalid Ahmed, Shawkat Hammoudeh. 2017. Trade openness–
carbon emissions nexus: The importance of turning points of trade openness for country panels.
Energy Economics 61, 221-232. [Crossref]
149. Adolfo Roquez-Diaz, Lorenzo Escot. 2017. Relationship between trade openness and economic
growth in Latin America: A causality analysis with heterogeneous panel data. Review of Development
Economics . [Crossref]
150. Diego Cerdeiro, Andras Komaromi. 2017. Trade and Income in the Long Run: Are There Really
Gains, and Are They Widely Shared?. IMF Working Papers 17:231, 1. [Crossref]
151. Kimberly Beaton, Aliona Cebotari, Andras Komaromi. 2017. Revisiting the Link between Trade,
Growth and Inequality: Lessons for Latin America and the Caribbean. IMF Working Papers 17:46,
1. [Crossref]
152. Valerie Cerra, Martha Tesfaye Woldemichael. 2017. Launching Export Accelerations in Latin America
and the World. IMF Working Papers 17:43, 1. [Crossref]
153. Adedoyin Isola Lawal, Tony I. Nwanji, Abiola Asaleye, Victor Ahmed. 2016. Economic growth,
financial development and trade openness in Nigeria: An application of the ARDL bound testing
approach. Cogent Economics & Finance 4:1. . [Crossref]
154. Oylum Şehvez Ergüzel, Hakan Tunahan, Sinan Esen. 2016. Measuring the globalization of cities from
the new regionalism perspective. SpringerPlus 5:1. . [Crossref]
155. Neil Foster-McGregor, Johannes Pöschl. 2016. Productivity effects of knowledge transfers through
labour mobility. Journal of Productivity Analysis 46:2-3, 169-184. [Crossref]
156. Ali Sina Önder, Hakan Yilmazkuday. 2016. Trade partner diversification and growth: How trade links
matter. Journal of Macroeconomics 50, 241-258. [Crossref]
157. Marine Carrasco, Guy Tchuente. 2016. Efficient Estimation with Many Weak Instruments Using
Regularization Techniques. Econometric Reviews 35:8-10, 1609-1637. [Crossref]
158. Heinz Welsch, Jan Kühling. 2016. Macroeconomic performance and institutional change: evidence
from subjective well-being data. Journal of Applied Economics 19:2, 193-217. [Crossref]
159. Muhammad Shahbaz, Syed Jawad Hussain Shahzad, Nawaz Ahmad, Shaista Alam. 2016. Financial
development and environmental quality: The way forward. Energy Policy 98, 353-364. [Crossref]
160. Amanda Lea Robinson. 2016. Internal Borders: Ethnic-Based Market Segmentation in Malawi. World
Development 87, 371-384. [Crossref]
161. Adel Ben Youssef, Shawkat Hammoudeh, Anis Omri. 2016. Simultaneity modeling analysis of the
environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis. Energy Economics 60, 266-274. [Crossref]
162. . Impact of Migration on Income Levels in Advanced Economies . [Crossref]
163. Weiwei Wang. 2016. Does Deep Integration Promote Trade Development?. The International Trade
Journal 30:5, 415-433. [Crossref]
164. LING XIONG, SHAOZHOU QI. 2016. FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND CARBON
EMISSIONS IN CHINESE PROVINCES: A SPATIAL PANEL DATA ANALYSIS. The Singapore
Economic Review 1740020. [Crossref]
165. Cong S. Pham, Mehmet Ali Ulubaşoğlu. 2016. The role of endowments, technology and size in
international trade: new evidence from product-level data. The Journal of International Trade &
Economic Development 25:7, 913-937. [Crossref]
166. Tay-Cheng Ma, Lishu Ouyang. 2016. DEMOCRACY AND GROWTH: A PERSPECTIVE FROM
DEMOCRATIC EXPERIENCE. Economic Inquiry 54:4, 1790-1804. [Crossref]
167. Gazi M. Hassan, Mamta Chowdhury, Mohammed Bhuyan. 2016. Growth Effects of Remittances in
Bangladesh: Is there a U-shaped Relationship?. International Migration 54:5, 105-121. [Crossref]
168. Thomas Barnebeck Andersen, Carl-Johan Dalgaard, Pablo Selaya. 2016. Climate and the Emergence
of Global Income Differences. The Review of Economic Studies 83:4, 1334-1363. [Crossref]
169. Trond-Arne Borgersen, Roswitha M. King. 2016. Industrial structure and jobless growth in transition
economies. Post-Communist Economies 28:4, 520-536. [Crossref]
170. Mohammad Mafizur Rahman, Shamsul Arifeen Khan Mamun. 2016. Energy use, international trade
and economic growth nexus in Australia: New evidence from an extended growth model. Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64, 806-816. [Crossref]
171. Natalia Ramondo, Andrés Rodríguez-Clare, Milagro Saborío-Rodríguez. 2016. Trade, Domestic
Frictions, and Scale Effects. American Economic Review 106:10, 3159-3184. [Abstract] [View PDF
article] [PDF with links]
172. Sandra Sequeira. 2016. Corruption, Trade Costs, and Gains from Tariff Liberalization: Evidence from
Southern Africa. American Economic Review 106:10, 3029-3063. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF
with links]
173. Joan Costa-Font, Núria Mas. 2016. ‘Globesity’? The effects of globalization on obesity and caloric
intake. Food Policy 64, 121-132. [Crossref]
174. Muhammad Tariq Majeed. 2016. Economic growth, inequality and trade in developing countries.
International Journal of Development Issues 15:3, 240-253. [Crossref]
175. Nicholas Charron, Carl Dahlström, Victor Lapuente. 2016. Measuring Meritocracy in the Public
Sector in Europe: a New National and Sub-National Indicator. European Journal on Criminal Policy
and Research 22:3, 499-523. [Crossref]
176. Dong-Hyeon Kim, Shu-Chin Lin, Yu-Bo Suen. 2016. Trade, growth and growth volatility: New
panel evidence. International Review of Economics & Finance 45, 384-399. [Crossref]
177. John Ssozi, Simplice A. Asongu. 2016. The Effects of Remittances on Output per Worker in Sub-
Saharan Africa: A Production Function Approach. South African Journal of Economics 84:3, 400-421.
[Crossref]
178. Farai Manwa, Albert Wijeweera. 2016. Trade liberalisation and economic growth link: The case of
Southern African Custom Union countries. Economic Analysis and Policy 51, 12-21. [Crossref]
179. Fabian Wahl. 2016. Does medieval trade still matter? Historical trade centers, agglomeration and
contemporary economic development. Regional Science and Urban Economics 60, 50-60. [Crossref]
180. Andros Kourtellos, Thanasis Stengos, Chih Ming Tan. 2016. STRUCTURAL THRESHOLD
REGRESSION. Econometric Theory 32:04, 827-860. [Crossref]
181. Mariano Negri, Guido G. Porto. 2016. Burley tobacco clubs in Malawi: Nonmarket institutions for
exports. International Economics 146, 85-107. [Crossref]
182. Dibyendu Maiti, Sunil Kumar. 2016. Regional agreements, trade cost and flows in the Pacific.
Economia Politica 33:2, 181-199. [Crossref]
183. Oscar Bernal, Alexandre Girard, Jean-Yves Gnabo. 2016. The importance of conflicts of interest in
attributing sovereign credit ratings. International Review of Law and Economics 47, 48-66. [Crossref]
184. Xu Tian, Xiaoheng Zhang, Yingheng Zhou, Xiaohua Yu. 2016. Regional income inequality in China
revisited: A perspective from club convergence. Economic Modelling 56, 50-58. [Crossref]
185. Mehdi Abid. 2016. Impact of economic, financial, and institutional factors on CO2 emissions:
Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa economies. Utilities Policy 41, 85-94. [Crossref]
186. Harald Badinger, Peter Egger. 2016. Productivity Spillovers Across Countries and Industries: New
Evidence From OECD Countries. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 78:4, 501-521. [Crossref]
187. Usman Khalid. 2016. The effect of trade and political institutions on economic institutions. The
Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 1-22. [Crossref]
188. Andrea Filippetti, Marion Frenz, Grazia Ietto-Gillies. 2016. The impact of internationalization on
innovation at countries’ level: the role of absorptive capacity. Cambridge Journal of Economics bew032.
[Crossref]
189. Yan Wu, Chunlai Chen. 2016. The impact of foreign direct investment on urbanization in China.
Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy 21:3, 339-356. [Crossref]
190. Maoliang Bu, Chin-Te Lin, Bing Zhang. 2016. GLOBALIZATION AND CLIMATE CHANGE:
NEW EMPIRICAL PANEL DATA EVIDENCE. Journal of Economic Surveys 30:3, 577-595.
[Crossref]
191. Nicholas Charron. 2016. Diverging cohesion? Globalisation, state capacity and regional inequalities
within and across European countries. European Urban and Regional Studies 23:3, 355-373. [Crossref]
192. Merima Balavac, Geoff Pugh. 2016. The link between trade openness, export diversification,
institutions and output volatility in transition countries. Economic Systems 40:2, 273-287. [Crossref]
193. Annageldy ARAZMURADOV. 2016. THE IMPACT OF FOREIGN CAPITAL ON
MACROECONOMIC PERFORMANCE IN CENTRAL ASIA. Annals of Public and Cooperative
Economics 87:2, 275-304. [Crossref]
194. Kui-Wai Li, Xianbo Zhou, Zhewen Pan. 2016. Cross-country output convergence and growth:
Evidence from varying coefficient nonparametric method. Economic Modelling 55, 32-41. [Crossref]
195. Aslan Alper, Gozbasi Onur. 2016. Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for sub-elements of the
carbon emissions in China. Natural Hazards 82:2, 1327-1340. [Crossref]
196. Gao Liu, Rui Sun. 2016. Economic Openness and Subnational Borrowing. Public Budgeting & Finance
36:2, 45-69. [Crossref]
197. Alberto Alesina, Johann Harnoss, Hillel Rapoport. 2016. Birthplace diversity and economic
prosperity. Journal of Economic Growth 21:2, 101-138. [Crossref]
198. Zhiqiang Dong, Yongjing Zhang. 2016. Accumulated social capital, institutional quality, and economic
performance: Evidence from China. Economic Systems 40:2, 206-219. [Crossref]
199. Yener Kandogan, Scott D. Johnson. 2016. Role of economic and political freedom in the emergence
of global middle class. International Business Review 25:3, 711-725. [Crossref]
200. Jason Sturgess. 2016. Multinational Firms, Internal Capital Markets, and the Value of Global
Diversification. Quarterly Journal of Finance 06:02, 1650004. [Crossref]
201. Timothy M. Peterson. 2016. US Disaster Aid and Bilateral Trade Growth. Foreign Policy Analysis
orw046. [Crossref]
202. Agnieszka Gehringer, Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, Felicitas Nowak-Lehmann Danzinger. 2016.
What are the drivers of total factor productivity in the European Union?. Economics of Innovation and
New Technology 25:4, 406-434. [Crossref]
203. Ferdinand Owoundi. 2016. Do exchange rate misalignments really affect economic growth? The case
of Sub-Saharan African countries. International Economics 145, 92-110. [Crossref]
204. Jozefína Semančíková. 2016. Trade, Trade Openness and Macroeconomic Performance. Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences 220, 407-416. [Crossref]
205. Frédéric Docquier, Elisabetta Lodigiani, Hillel Rapoport, Maurice Schiff. 2016. Emigration and
democracy. Journal of Development Economics 120, 209-223. [Crossref]
206. A. Tientao, D. Legros, M.C. Pichery. 2016. Technology spillover and TFP growth: A spatial Durbin
model. International Economics 145, 21-31. [Crossref]
207. Magdalene Silberberger, Jens Königer. 2016. Regulation, trade and economic growth. Economic
Systems . [Crossref]
208. Abdelaziz Hakimi, Helmi Hamdi. 2016. Trade liberalization, FDI inflows, environmental quality and
economic growth: A comparative analysis between Tunisia and Morocco. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 58, 1445-1456. [Crossref]
209. Thai-Ha Le, Youngho Chang, Donghyun Park. 2016. Trade openness and environmental quality:
International evidence. Energy Policy 92, 45-55. [Crossref]
210. Benjamin Furlan, Martin Gächter, Bob Krebs, Harald Oberhofer. 2016. Democratization and Real
Exchange Rates,. Scottish Journal of Political Economy 63:2, 216-242. [Crossref]
211. . Breaking the Oil Spell . [Crossref]
212. Azzedine Ghoufrane, Philippe Hugon, Nassim Oulmane. 2016. Transformations structurelles et
institutionnelles des économies au sud de la Méditerranée. Canadian Journal of Development Studies /
Revue canadienne d'études du développement 37:2, 131-141. [Crossref]
213. William W. Olney. 2016. IMPACT OF CORRUPTION ON FIRM-LEVEL EXPORT
DECISIONS. Economic Inquiry 54:2, 1105-1127. [Crossref]
214. Xuepeng Liu. 2016. Trade Agreements and Economic Growth. Southern Economic Journal 82:4,
1374-1401. [Crossref]
215. Enrique Moral-Benito. 2016. Growth Empirics in Panel Data Under Model Uncertainty and Weak
Exogeneity. Journal of Applied Econometrics 31:3, 584-602. [Crossref]
216. Darren K. Burns, Andrew P. Jones, Marc Suhrcke. 2016. The relationship between international trade
and non-nutritional health outcomes: A systematic review of quantitative studies. Social Science &
Medicine 152, 9-17. [Crossref]
217. Sakiru Adebola Solarin. 2016. Sources of labour productivity: a panel investigation of the role of
military expenditure. Quality & Quantity 50:2, 849-865. [Crossref]
218. Mariam Camarero, Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, Felicitas Nowak-Lehmann, Cecilio Tamarit. 2016.
Trade Openness and Income: A Tale of Two Regions. The World Economy 39:3, 386-408. [Crossref]
219. Quy-Toan Do, Andrei A. Levchenko, Claudio Raddatz. 2016. Comparative advantage, international
trade, and fertility. Journal of Development Economics 119, 48-66. [Crossref]
220. Peter Eppinger, Niklas Potrafke. 2016. Did Globalisation Influence Credit Market Deregulation?. The
World Economy 39:3, 426-443. [Crossref]
221. Faiza Abbasi, Khalid Riaz. 2016. CO2 emissions and financial development in an emerging economy:
An augmented VAR approach. Energy Policy 90, 102-114. [Crossref]
222. Cheol S. Eun, Lingling Wang. 2016. International Sourcing and Capital Structure. Review of Finance
20:2, 535-574. [Crossref]
223. Kuntal Das, Thomas Quirk. 2016. Which Institutions Promote Growth? Revisiting the Evidence.
Economic Papers: A journal of applied economics and policy 35:1, 37-58. [Crossref]
224. Sasi Iamsiraroj. 2016. The foreign direct investment–economic growth nexus. International Review
of Economics & Finance 42, 116-133. [Crossref]
225. Lanouar Charfeddine, Karim Ben Khediri. 2016. Financial development and environmental quality in
UAE: Cointegration with structural breaks. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 55, 1322-1335.
[Crossref]
226. Sumit K. Majumdar. 2016. R&D and the overseas earnings of Indian firms. Technology in Society 44,
104-111. [Crossref]
227. Jong-Wha Lee, Ju Hyun Pyun. 2016. Does Trade Integration Contribute to Peace?. Review of
Development Economics 20:1, 327-344. [Crossref]
228. Cui Hu, Faqin Lin, Xiaosong Wang. 2016. Learning from exporting in China. Economics of Transition
n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
229. Muhammad Javid, Fatima Sharif. 2016. Environmental Kuznets curve and financial development in
Pakistan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54, 406-414. [Crossref]
230. Theo S. Eicher, David J. Kuenzel. 2016. The elusive effects of trade on growth: Export diversity
and economic take-off. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique 49:1, 264-295.
[Crossref]
231. Sheikh Shahnawaz. 2016. Few and Far Between: Some Explanations of Health Provisions in Trade
Agreements. Journal of Globalization and Development 7:2. . [Crossref]
232. Sena Kimm Gnangnon. 2016. Trade openness and structural vulnerability in developing countries.
Journal of Economic Studies 43:1, 70-89. [Crossref]
233. Muhammad Tahir, Mario Ruiz Estrada, Imran Khan, Muhammad Asim Afridi. 2016. The role of
trade openness for industrial sector development: panel data evidence from SAARC region. Journal
of Asia Business Studies 10:1, 93-103. [Crossref]
234. Muhammad Shahbaz, Farooq Ahmed Jam, Sadia Bibi, Nanthakumar Loganathan. 2016. Multivariate
Granger causality between CO 2 emissions, energy intensity and economic growth in Portugal:
evidence from cointegration and causality analysis. Technological and Economic Development of Economy
22:1, 47-74. [Crossref]
235. Bojan Shimbov, Maite Alguacil, Celestino Suárez. 2016. International Production Networks and
Economic Growth: The Case of the Western Balkan Countries. Eastern European Economics 54:1,
49-70. [Crossref]
236. Lodewijk Smets, Stephen Knack. 2016. World Bank Lending and the Quality of Economic Policy.
The Journal of Development Studies 52:1, 72-91. [Crossref]
237. Xinshen Diao, Adam Kennedy. 2016. Economywide Impact of Maize Export Bans on Agricultural
Growth and Household Welfare in Tanzania: A Dynamic Computable General Equilibrium Model
Analysis. Development Policy Review 34:1, 101-134. [Crossref]
238. Sambuddha Ghatak. 2016. Challenging the State: Effect of Minority Discrimination, Economic
Globalization, and Political Openness on Domestic Terrorism. International Interactions 42:1, 56-80.
[Crossref]
239. Christian Jensen. 2016. COMPETITION AS AN ENGINE OF ECONOMIC GROWTH WITH
PRODUCER HETEROGENEITY. Macroeconomic Dynamics 20:01, 362-379. [Crossref]
240. Nicole Detraz, Dursun Peksen. 2016. The Effect of IMF Programs on Women’s Economic and
Political Rights. International Interactions 42:1, 81-105. [Crossref]
241. Giancarlo Gandolfo. Growth in an Open Economy 311-329. [Crossref]
242. Irene Brambilla, Guido G. Porto. 2016. High-income export destinations, quality and wages. Journal
of International Economics 98, 21-35. [Crossref]
243. Todd Mitton. 2016. The wealth of subnations: Geography, institutions, and within-country
development. Journal of Development Economics 118, 88-111. [Crossref]
244. Ohad Raveh, Ariell Reshef. 2016. Capital imports composition, complementarities, and the skill
premium in developing countries. Journal of Development Economics 118, 183-206. [Crossref]
245. Kym Anderson. How Trade Can Boost Food Security 19-38. [Crossref]
246. C.I. Jones. The Facts of Economic Growth 3-69. [Crossref]
247. Nandini Ramanujam, Nicholas Caivano. 2016. The BRIC Nations and the Anatomy of Economic
Development: The Core Tenets of Rule of Law. Law and Development Review 9:2. . [Crossref]
248. Jayanthi Thennakoon, Jagath Dissanayake. 2015. Trade openness, income, and role of institutions:
A revisit using heterogeneous panel data models. Cogent Economics & Finance 3:1. . [Crossref]
249. Markus Brueckner, Daniel Lederman. 2015. Trade Openness and Economic Growth: Panel Data
Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Economica 82, 1302-1323. [Crossref]
250. Faqin Lin. 2015. Learning by exporting effect in China revisited: An instrumental Approach. China
Economic Review 36, 1-13. [Crossref]
251. Stephen Kosack, Jennifer L. Tobin. 2015. Which Countries’ Citizens Are Better Off With Trade?.
World Development 76, 95-113. [Crossref]
252. Santiago Roca T., Luis Simabuko N.. 2015. Little value creation, articulation and propagating forces:
A hypothesis for the Mexican manufacturing sector. Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative
Science 20:39, 94-104. [Crossref]
253. Beatriz Yepes-Rios, Kelly Gonzalez-Tapia, Maria Alejandra Gonzalez-Perez. 2015. The integration
of stock exchanges: The case of the Latin American Integrated Market (MILA) and its impact on
ownership and internationalization status in Colombian brokerage firms. Journal of Economics, Finance
and Administrative Science 20:39, 84-93. [Crossref]
254. Abdulaziz B. Shifa. 2015. Does Agricultural Growth Cause Manufacturing Growth?. Economica 82,
1107-1125. [Crossref]
255. Maureen Were. 2015. Differential effects of trade on economic growth and investment: A cross-
country empirical investigation. Journal of African Trade 2:1-2, 71-85. [Crossref]
256. JOE-MING LEE, KU-HSIEH CHEN, CHIN-HO CHO. 2015. THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN CO 2 EMISSIONS AND FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT. The Singapore Economic
Review 60:05, 1550117. [Crossref]
257. Bin Shen, Jiang Zhang, Yixiao Li, Qiuhua Zheng, Xingsen Li. 2015. International Trade Modelling
Using Open Flow Networks: A Flow-Distance Based Analysis. PLOS ONE 10:11, e0142936.
[Crossref]
258. Inkyo Cheong, Kamonchanok Suthiwartnarueput. 2015. ASEAN’s initiatives for regional economic
integration and the implications for maritime logistics reforms. The International Journal of Logistics
Management 26:3, 479-493. [Crossref]
259. Phanindra V. Wunnava, Aniruddha Mitra, Robert E. Prasch. 2015. Globalization and the Ethnic
Divide: Recent Longitudinal Evidence*. Social Science Quarterly 96:5, 1475-1492. [Crossref]
260. Federico José Trindade, Lilyan Estela Fulginiti. 2015. Is there a slowdown in agricultural productivity
growth in South America?. Agricultural Economics 46:S1, 69-81. [Crossref]
261. Tommy T. Wu. 2015. Firm heterogeneity, trade, multinationals, and growth: A quantitative
evaluation. Journal of International Economics 97:2, 359-375. [Crossref]
262. Andrew X. Li. 2015. State-Society Synergy and Export Sophistication. Economics & Politics 27:3,
433-458. [Crossref]
263. Sanghyun Hwang, Seungrae Lee. 2015. Regional economic integration and multinational firm
strategies. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 24:7, 968-1013. [Crossref]
264. Rikhil R. Bhavnani, Bethany Lacina. 2015. The Effects of Weather-Induced Migration on Sons of
the Soil Riots in India. World Politics 67:04, 760-794. [Crossref]
265. Wei Shi, Yinuo Tang. 2015. Cultural similarity as in-group favoritism: The impact of religious and
ethnic similarities on alliance formation and announcement returns. Journal of Corporate Finance 34,
32-46. [Crossref]
266. Caroline Flammer. 2015. Does product market competition foster corporate social responsibility?
Evidence from trade liberalization. Strategic Management Journal 36:10, 1469-1485. [Crossref]
267. Thomas Sampson. 2015. Dynamic Selection: An Idea Flows Theory of Entry, Trade and Growth.
The Quarterly Journal of Economics qjv032. [Crossref]
268. Miguel Martín-Retortillo, Vicente Pinilla. 2015. On the causes of economic growth in Europe: why
did agricultural labour productivity not converge between 1950 and 2005?. Cliometrica 9:3, 359-396.
[Crossref]
269. GIORGIO FAGIOLO, GIANLUCA SANTONI. 2015. Human-mobility networks, country income,
and labor productivity. Network Science 3:03, 377-407. [Crossref]
270. Nicholas Apergis, Arusha Cooray. 2015. OLD WINE IN A NEW BOTTLE: TRADE OPENNESS
AND FDI FLOWS-ARE THE EMERGING ECONOMIES CONVERGING?. Contemporary
Economic Policy n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
271. Daniel Sakyi, Jose Villaverde, Adolfo Maza. 2015. Trade openness, income levels, and economic
growth: The case of developing countries, 1970–2009. The Journal of International Trade & Economic
Development 24:6, 860-882. [Crossref]
272. João Tovar Jalles, Jose Tavares. 2015. Trade, scale or social capital? Technological progress in poor and
rich countries. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 24:6, 767-808. [Crossref]
273. Madhu Sehrawat, A K Giri, Geetilaxmi Mohapatra. 2015. The impact of financial development,
economic growth and energy consumption on environmental degradation. Management of
Environmental Quality: An International Journal 26:5, 666-682. [Crossref]
274. Vance Ginn, Travis Roach. 2015. An Oil-Producing State’s Ability to Cope after a Regional Free
Trade Agreement—The Case of Texas and NAFTA. The International Trade Journal 29:4, 309-336.
[Crossref]
275. Chandan Sharma, Ritesh Kumar Mishra. 2015. International trade and performance of firms:
Unraveling export, import and productivity puzzle. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance
57, 61-74. [Crossref]
276. Stephen Bryan, Robert Nash, Ajay Patel. 2015. The effect of cultural distance on contracting
decisions: The case of executive compensation. Journal of Corporate Finance 33, 180-195. [Crossref]
277. Benjarong Suwankiri, Assaf Razin, Efraim Sadka. 2015. The Welfare State and Migration: A Dynamic
Analysis of Political Coalitions. Research in Economics . [Crossref]
278. Wajahat Ali, Azrai Abdullah. The long-run relationship between economic growth, financial
development, trade openness and CO<inf>2</inf> emissions in Malaysia 309-313. [Crossref]
279. Philippe Aghion, Ufuk Akcigit, Peter Howitt. 2015. The Schumpeterian Growth Paradigm. Annual
Review of Economics 7:1, 557-575. [Crossref]
280. Dave Donaldson. 2015. The Gains from Market Integration. Annual Review of Economics 7:1, 619-647.
[Crossref]
281. Kazuki Kagohashi, Tetsuya Tsurumi, Shunsuke Managi. 2015. The Effects of International Trade on
Water Use. PLOS ONE 10:7, e0132133. [Crossref]
282. Muhamed Zulkhibri, Ismaeel Naiya, Reza Ghazal. 2015. Structural change and economic growth in
selected emerging economies. International Journal of Development Issues 14:2, 98-116. [Crossref]
283. Donghun Kim. 2015. Offshore Banking and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Analysis. Global
Economic Review 44:3, 308-323. [Crossref]
284. Sanika Sulochani Ramanayake, Keun Lee. 2015. Does openness lead to sustained economic growth?
Export growth versus other variables as determinants of economic growth. Journal of the Asia Pacific
Economy 20:3, 345-368. [Crossref]
285. Volodymyr Lugovskyy, Alexandre Skiba. 2015. How geography affects quality. Journal of Development
Economics 115, 156-180. [Crossref]
286. Muhammad Tahir, Toseef Azid. 2015. The relationship between international trade openness and
economic growth in the developing economies. Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies
8:2, 123-139. [Crossref]
287. Jose L. Tongzon, Sang-Yoon Lee. 2015. The challenges of economic integration: the case of shipping
in ASEAN countries. The Pacific Review 1-22. [Crossref]
288. Michaël Bonnal, Mehmet E. Yaya. 2015. Political Institutions, Trade Openness, and Economic
Growth: New Evidence. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 1-16. [Crossref]
289. Augusto de la Torre, Tatiana Didier, Alain Ize, Daniel Lederman, Sergio L. Schmukler. The Structure
of Trade Linkages and Economic Growth 73-132. [Crossref]
290. Augusto de la Torre, Tatiana Didier, Alain Ize, Daniel Lederman, Sergio L. Schmukler. Overview
1-40. [Crossref]
291. Xiaohuan Lan, Ben G. Li. 2015. The Economics of Nationalism. American Economic Journal:
Economic Policy 7:2, 294-325. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
292. Solomon M. Hsiang, Kyle C. Meng. 2015. Tropical Economics. American Economic Review 105:5,
257-261. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
293. Alireza Naghavi, Chiara Strozzi. 2015. Intellectual property rights, diasporas, and domestic innovation.
Journal of International Economics 96:1, 150-161. [Crossref]
294. Ernest Miguélez, Rosina Moreno. 2015. Knowledge flows and the absorptive capacity of regions.
Research Policy 44:4, 833-848. [Crossref]
295. Dan Liu, Christopher M. Meissner. 2015. Market potential and the rise of US productivity leadership.
Journal of International Economics 96:1, 72-87. [Crossref]
296. Daniel Yuichi Kono, Gabriella R. Montinola. 2015. Foreign Aid, Time Horizons, and Trade Policy.
Comparative Political Studies 48:6, 788-819. [Crossref]
297. Harald Badinger, Jesus Crespo Cuaresma. 2015. Aggregravity: estimating gravity models from
aggregate data. Applied Economics 47:20, 2119-2126. [Crossref]
298. Robert Dixon, Alessandra Guariglia, Ratnam Vijayakumaran. 2015. Managerial ownership, corporate
governance and firms' exporting decisions: evidence from Chinese listed companies. The European
Journal of Finance 1-39. [Crossref]
299. Ariel Burstein, Javier Cravino. 2015. Measured Aggregate Gains from International Trade. American
Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 7:2, 181-218. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
300. T. Janus, D. Riera-Crichton. 2015. The output effect of gross foreign investment reversals. Oxford
Economic Papers 67:2, 356-379. [Crossref]
301. Jingyan Fu, Chunjun Zhang. 2015. International trade, carbon leakage, and CO 2 emissions of
manufacturing industry. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment 1-7. [Crossref]
302. Nahla Samargandi, Jan Fidrmuc, Sugata Ghosh. 2015. Is the Relationship Between Financial
Development and Economic Growth Monotonic? Evidence from a Sample of Middle-Income
Countries. World Development 68, 66-81. [Crossref]
303. Jun Sangjoon. 2015. The Nexus between FDI and Growth in the SAARC Member Countries. Journal
of East Asian Economic Integration 19:1, 39-70. [Crossref]
304. Yusaf H. Akbar. Regulatory Evolution, Multinational Firms, and Neo-Transition Economies 99-119.
[Crossref]
305. Matei Alexianu. Post-Soviet Transition: The Impact of Russian Influence on Institutions 167-189.
[Crossref]
306. KOSTADIS J. PAPAIOANNOU, JAN LUITEN VAN ZANDEN. 2015. The dictator effect: how
long years in office affect economic development. Journal of Institutional Economics 11:01, 111-139.
[Crossref]
307. Mehmet Pinar. 2015. Measuring world governance: revisiting the institutions hypothesis. Empirical
Economics 48:2, 747-778. [Crossref]
308. Niklas Potrafke. 2015. The Evidence on Globalisation. The World Economy 38:3, 509-552. [Crossref]
309. Titus O. Awokuse, Ruizhi Xie. 2015. Does Agriculture Really Matter for Economic Growth in
Developing Countries?. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie
63:1, 77-99. [Crossref]
310. Antoine Gervais. 2015. Trade and growth: A gravity approach. Southern Economic Journal n/a-n/a.
[Crossref]
311. Amanda Murdie, Dursun Peksen. 2015. Women’s rights INGO shaming and the government respect
for women’s rights. The Review of International Organizations 10:1, 1-22. [Crossref]
312. Dibyendu Maiti, Sugata Marjit. 2015. Regional Openness, Income Growth and Disparity during 1980–
2009. South Asia Economic Journal 16:1, 145-166. [Crossref]
313. David Roodman. 2015. A Replication of “Counting Chickens When They Hatch” ( Economic Journal
2012). Public Finance Review 43:2, 256-281. [Crossref]
314. Elboiashi Hosein. 2015. The effect of FDI on economic growth and the importance of host country
characteristics. Journal of Economics and International Finance 7:2, 25-41. [Crossref]
315. Juyoung Cheong, Do Won Kwak, Kam Ki Tang. 2015. Heterogeneous Effects of Preferential Trade
Agreements: How does Partner Similarity Matter?. World Development 66, 222-236. [Crossref]
316. Jacob W. Musila, Zelealem Yiheyis. 2015. The impact of trade openness on growth: The case of
Kenya. Journal of Policy Modeling . [Crossref]
317. Sayyed Mahdi Ziaei. 2015. Effects of financial development indicators on energy consumption and
CO2 emission of European, East Asian and Oceania countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 42, 752-759. [Crossref]
318. Cheol S. Eun, Lingling Wang, Steven C. Xiao. 2015. Culture and R2. Journal of Financial Economics
115:2, 283-303. [Crossref]
319. Aleksandra Parteka, Joanna Wolszczak-Derlacz. 2015. Integrated sectors - diversified earnings: the
(missing) impact of offshoring on wages and wage convergence in the EU27. The Journal of Economic
Inequality . [Crossref]
320. Chien-Chiang Lee, Chi-Chuan Lee, Chun-Ping Chang. 2015. Globalization, Economic Growth and
Institutional Development in China. Global Economic Review 44:1, 31-63. [Crossref]
321. Aniruddha Mitra, James T. Bang, Arnab Biswas. 2015. Gender Equality and Economic Growth: Is it
Equality of Opportunity or Equality of Outcomes?. Feminist Economics 21:1, 110-135. [Crossref]
322. Mohammad Mafizur Rahman, Muhammad Shahbaz, Abdul Farooq. 2015. Financial Development,
International Trade, and Economic Growth in Australia: New Evidence From Multivariate Framework
Analysis. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business 16:1, 21-43. [Crossref]
323. Frank McDonald. 2015. Institutional systems and catch-up in China. Journal of Chinese Economic and
Business Studies 13:1, 1-15. [Crossref]
324. J. Paul Dunne, Nan Tian. 2015. Military Expenditure, Economic Growth and Heterogeneity. Defence
and Peace Economics 26:1, 15-31. [Crossref]
325. Sokchea Lim, Walter O. Simmons. 2015. Do remittances promote economic growth in the Caribbean
Community and Common Market?. Journal of Economics and Business 77, 42-59. [Crossref]
326. Mariya Aleksynska, Ahmed Tritah. 2015. THE HETEROGENEITY OF IMMIGRANTS, HOST
COUNTRIES' INCOME AND PRODUCTIVITY: A CHANNEL ACCOUNTING APPROACH.
Economic Inquiry 53:1, 150. [Crossref]
327. Cenap Çakmak, Murat Ustaoğlu. Restructuring the Syrian Economy 43-67. [Crossref]
328. Korhan Gokmenoglu, Nesrin Ozatac, Baris Memduh Eren. 2015. Relationship between Industrial
Production, Financial Development and Carbon Emissions: The Case of Turkey. Procedia Economics
and Finance 25, 463-470. [Crossref]
329. Ellyn Creasey, Ahmed S. Rahman, Katherine A. Smith. 2015. DOES NATION BUILDING SPUR
ECONOMIC GROWTH?. Economic Inquiry 53:1, 660. [Crossref]
330. Henri Atangana Ondoa, Henri Ngoa Tabi. The Impact of South-South and North-South Trade on
Industrialization in Africa 125-150. [Crossref]
331. Zhigang Li, Nan Xu, Jia Yuan. 2015. New evidence on trade-environment linkage via air visibility.
Economics Letters 128, 72. [Crossref]
332. Ján Huňady, Marta Orviská. 2015. The Non-Linear Effect of Corporate Taxes on Economic Growth.
Timisoara Journal of Economics and Business 8:s1. . [Crossref]
333. Manuel García-Santana, Roberto Ramos. 2015. Distortions and the size distribution of plants:
evidence from cross-country data. SERIEs 6:3, 279. [Crossref]
334. Christopher J Coyne, Claudia R Williamson. 2015. Foreign Aid and the Culture of Contracting.
Eastern Economic Journal 41:1, 102-125. [Crossref]
335. Nataša Stanojević, Ana Jovancai. 2015. Diversification of Serbia's Export Markets - Potentials for
Export to The Countries of Caspian Basin. Economic Themes 53:2. . [Crossref]
336. Mirajul Haq, Muhammad Luqman. 2014. The contribution of international trade to economic
growth through human capital accumulation: Evidence from nine Asian countries. Cogent Economics
& Finance 2:1. . [Crossref]
337. Steven Yamarik, Sucharita Ghosh. 2014. Broad versus regional integration: what matters more for
economic development?. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 1-33. [Crossref]
338. Jamel Jouini. 2014. Linkage between international trade and economic growth in GCC countries:
Empirical evidence from PMG estimation approach. The Journal of International Trade & Economic
Development 1-32. [Crossref]
339. Wolszczak-Derlacz Joanna. 2014. THE IMPACT OF DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN
COMPETITION ON SECTORAL GROWTH: A CROSS-COUNTRY ANALYSIS. Bulletin of
Economic Research 66:S1, S110-S131. [Crossref]
340. Nadia Doytch, Nina Thelen, Ronald U. Mendoza. 2014. The impact of FDI on child labor: Insights
from an empirical analysis of sectoral FDI data and case studies. Children and Youth Services Review
47, 157-167. [Crossref]
341. Fabrizio Carmignani. 2014. The Curse of Being Landlocked: Institutions Rather than Trade. The
World Economy n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
342. Maëlan Le Goff, Raju Jan Singh. 2014. Does trade reduce poverty? A view from Africa. Journal of
African Trade 1:1, 5-14. [Crossref]
343. Augustin K. Fosu. 2014. Editorial. Journal of African Trade 1:1, 1-3. [Crossref]
344. Feng Wei, Yu Kong. 2014. Government Governance, Legal Environment and Sustainable Economic
Development. Sustainability 6:12, 2248-2263. [Crossref]
345. L. Alan Winters, Antonio Martuscelli. 2014. Trade Liberalization and Poverty: What Have We
Learned in a Decade?. Annual Review of Resource Economics 6:1, 493-512. [Crossref]
346. Robert Gillanders, Karl Whelan. 2014. Open For Business? Institutions, Business Environment and
Economic Development. Kyklos 67:4, 535-558. [Crossref]
347. Sandra Sequeira, Simeon Djankov. 2014. Corruption and firm behavior: Evidence from African ports.
Journal of International Economics 94:2, 277-294. [Crossref]
348. Bakar Normizan, Ishii Yasunori. 2014. Export Competition between Landlocked and Coastal
Countries: An Analysis of Strategic Export Policies. Review of Development Economics 18:4, 804-812.
[Crossref]
349. Muhammad Tahir, Imran Khan. 2014. Trade openness and economic growth in the Asian region.
Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies 7:3, 136-152. [Crossref]
350. Ousmanou Njikam. 2014. Trade reform and firm-level labor demand in Cameroon. The Journal of
International Trade & Economic Development 23:7, 946-978. [Crossref]
351. Giray Gozgor. 2014. The impact of trade openness on the unemployment rate in G7 countries. The
Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 23:7, 1018-1037. [Crossref]
352. Elissa Braunstein. 2014. Patriarchy versus Islam: Gender and Religion in Economic Growth. Feminist
Economics 20:4, 58-86. [Crossref]
353. Valeria Costantini, Paolo Liberati. 2014. Technology transfer, institutions and development.
Technological Forecasting and Social Change 88, 26-48. [Crossref]
354. Pedro Brinca. 2014. Distortions in the neoclassical growth model: A cross-country analysis. Journal
of Economic Dynamics and Control 47, 1-19. [Crossref]
355. David H. Papell, Ruxandra Prodan. 2014. Long run time series tests of constant steady-state growth.
Economic Modelling 42, 464-474. [Crossref]
356. Thomas Gries, Rainer Grundmann. 2014. Trade and fertility in the developing world: the impact of
trade and trade structure. Journal of Population Economics 27:4, 1165-1186. [Crossref]
357. Shujaat Abbas. 2014. Trade liberalization and its economic impact on developing and least developed
countries. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy 13:3, 215-221. [Crossref]
358. Sèna Kimm Gnangnon. 2014. Does structural economic vulnerability matter for public indebtedness
in developing countries?. Journal of Economic Studies 41:5, 644-671. [Crossref]
359. Leonid V. Azarnert. 2014. Agricultural Exports, Tariffs and Growth. Open Economies Review 25:4,
797-807. [Crossref]
360. Navaratnam Ravinthirakumaran. 2014. Applicability of Openness-led Growth Hypothesis in Sri
Lanka. South Asia Economic Journal 15:2, 241-263. [Crossref]
361. Simon Feeny, Sasi Iamsiraroj, Mark McGillivray. 2014. Remittances and Economic Growth: Larger
Impacts in Smaller Countries?. The Journal of Development Studies 50:8, 1055-1066. [Crossref]
362. John William Hatfield, William R. Hauk. 2014. Electoral regime and trade policy. Journal of
Comparative Economics 42:3, 518-534. [Crossref]
363. Minh Son Le. 2014. Trade openness and household welfare within a country: A microeconomic
analysis of Vietnamese households. Journal of Asian Economics 33, 56-70. [Crossref]
364. Arup Mitra, Chandan Sharma, Marie-Ange Véganzonès-Varoudakis. 2014. Trade liberalization,
technology transfer, and firms’ productive performance: The case of Indian manufacturing. Journal
of Asian Economics 33, 1-15. [Crossref]
365. József Tóth, Péter Gál. 2014. Is the New Wine World more efficient? Factors influencing technical
efficiency of wine production. Studies in Agricultural Economics 116:2, 95-99. [Crossref]
366. Jose Tongzon, Inkyo Cheong. 2014. The challenges of developing a competitive logistics industry in
ASEAN countries. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 17:4, 323-338. [Crossref]
367. Seda Meyveci Doganay, Selin Sayek, Fatma Taskin. 2014. Is environmental efficiency trade inducing
or trade hindering?. Energy Economics 44, 340-349. [Crossref]
368. Sattwik Santra. 2014. Non-homothetic preferences: Explaining unidirectional movements in wage
differentials. Journal of Development Economics 109, 87-97. [Crossref]
369. Qazi Muhammad Adnan Hye, Wee-Yeap Lau, Marie-Aimée Tourres. 2014. Does economic
liberalization promote economic growth in Pakistan? An empirical analysis. Quality & Quantity 48:4,
2097-2119. [Crossref]
370. Gary D. Libecap. 2014. Addressing Global Environmental Externalities: Transaction Costs
Considerations. Journal of Economic Literature 52:2, 424-479. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF
with links]
371. Marina Murat. 2014. Out of Sight, Not Out of Mind. Education Networks and International Trade.
World Development 58, 53-66. [Crossref]
372. Kuo-Hsing Kuo, Cheng-Te Lee, Chen Fang. 2014. Free Trade and Economic Growth. Australian
Economic Papers 53:1-2, 69-76. [Crossref]
373. Heather Congdon Fors. 2014. Social Globalization and Child Labor: A Cross-country Analysis. The
Developing Economies 52:2, 125-153. [Crossref]
374. Mahalia Jackman. 2014. Output Volatility and Tourism Specialization in Small Island Developing
States. Tourism Economics 20:3, 527-544. [Crossref]
375. A. Cooper Drury, Dursun Peksen. 2014. Women and economic statecraft: The negative impact
international economic sanctions visit on women. European Journal of International Relations 20:2,
463-490. [Crossref]
376. Chandan Sharma. 2014. Imported Intermediate Inputs, R&D, and Productivity at Firm Level:
Evidence from Indian Manufacturing Industries. The International Trade Journal 28:3, 246-263.
[Crossref]
377. Giorgio Fagiolo, Marina Mastrorillo. 2014. Does Human Migration Affect International Trade? A
Complex-Network Perspective. PLoS ONE 9:5, e97331. [Crossref]
378. Nicholas N Ngepah. 2014. International trade and agricultural production: Evidence from the
Southern African Development Community sub-region. Development Southern Africa 31:3, 494-514.
[Crossref]
379. Larry D. Qiu, Ying Xue. 2014. Understanding China’s foreign trade: a literature review (I). China
Economic Journal 7:2, 168-186. [Crossref]
380. Peter Egger, Christian Keuschnigg, Valeria Merlo, Georg Wamser. 2014. Corporate Taxes and Internal
Borrowing within Multinational Firms. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 6:2, 54-93.
[Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
381. Yothin Jinjarak. 2014. Equity prices and financial globalization. International Review of Financial
Analysis 33, 49-57. [Crossref]
382. Mayengbam Lalit Singh. 2014. Institutional Development Leading Trade Developments. Foreign
Trade Review 49:2, 177-191. [Crossref]
383. Jian Zhang, Ilan Alon, Yanan Chen. 2014. Does Chinese investment affect Sub-Saharan African
growth?. International Journal of Emerging Markets 9:2, 257-275. [Crossref]
384. Roberto Ezcurra, Andrés Rodríguez-Pose. 2014. Trade Openness and Spatial Inequality in Emerging
Countries. Spatial Economic Analysis 9:2, 162-182. [Crossref]
385. Emmanuel Frot, Anders Olofsgård, Maria Perrotta Berlin. 2014. Aid Effectiveness in Times of Political
Change: Lessons from the Post-Communist Transition. World Development 56, 127-138. [Crossref]
386. Minh Quang Dao. 2014. Exports, imports, government consumption and economic growth in upper-
middle income countries. Progress in Development Studies 14:2, 197-204. [Crossref]
387. M. O Saibu, O Akinbobola T.. 2014. Globalization, Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth
in Sub Saharan Africa. Journal of Economics and International Finance 6:3, 62-68. [Crossref]
388. Harald Badinger, Elisabeth Nindl. 2014. Globalisation and Corruption, Revisited. The World Economy
n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
389. Shenggang Ren, Baolong Yuan, Xie Ma, Xiaohong Chen. 2014. International trade, FDI (foreign
direct investment) and embodied CO2 emissions: A case study of Chinas industrial sectors. China
Economic Review 28, 123-134. [Crossref]
390. NILOY BOSE, ANTU PANINI MURSHID, CHITRALEKHA RATH. 2014. Finance and
Property Rights: Exploring Other Directions. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 46:2-3, 503-517.
[Crossref]
391. Philippe Aghion. 2014. Rationalizing Scherer's prophecy of an inverted-U relationship between
competition and innovation. ECONOMIA E POLITICA INDUSTRIALE :1, 13-23. [Crossref]
392. Francesc Ortega, Giovanni Peri. 2014. Openness and income: The roles of trade and migration. Journal
of International Economics 92:2, 231-251. [Crossref]
393. Giray Gozgor. 2014. Determinants of domestic credit levels in emerging markets: The role of external
factors. Emerging Markets Review 18, 1-18. [Crossref]
394. Vanesa Jordá, José María Sarabia. 2014. International Convergence in Well-Being Indicators. Social
Indicators Research . [Crossref]
395. Mounir Belloumi. 2014. The relationship between trade, FDI and economic growth in Tunisia: An
application of the autoregressive distributed lag model. Economic Systems . [Crossref]
396. Ilyes Abid, Olfa Kaabia, Khaled Guesmi. 2014. Stock market integration and risk premium: Empirical
evidence for emerging economies of South Asia. Economic Modelling 37, 408-416. [Crossref]
397. Olivier Cadot, Jaime de Melo. 2014. Evaluation in Aid for Trade: Introduction to the Symposium.
The World Economy n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
398. Ebru Hisamoglu. 2014. EU membership, institutions and growth: The case of Turkey. Economic
Modelling 38, 211-219. [Crossref]
399. Firmin Doko Tchatoka, Jean-Marie Dufour. 2014. Identification-robust inference for endogeneity
parameters in linear structural models. The Econometrics Journal 17:1, 165-187. [Crossref]
400. Camilla Mastromarco, Léopold Simar. 2014. EFFECT OF FDI AND TIME ON CATCHING UP:
NEW INSIGHTS FROM A CONDITIONAL NONPARAMETRIC FRONTIER ANALYSIS.
Journal of Applied Econometrics n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
401. Chibuike R. Oguanobi, Anthony A. Akamobi, Geraldine E. Nzeribe, Chibueze A. Aniebo,
Ogochukwu T. Chukwuma. 2014. Intra-Regional Trade and Sectoral Performances. Foreign Trade
Review 49:1, 95-106. [Crossref]
402. A.K.M. Nurul Hossain, Mohammad Abdul Munim Joarder. 2014. Does the formation of RTA
support the neoclassical growth theory and convergence hypothesis?. Journal of Economic Studies 41:1,
51-70. [Crossref]
403. Y. Chen, W. H. Huang, P. J. Regis. 2014. Do Asia and Pacific countries compete in corporate tax
rates?. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy 19:1, 25-51. [Crossref]
404. Diego Comin, Martí Mestieri. Technology Diffusion: Measurement, Causes, and Consequences
565-622. [Crossref]
405. Arnaud Costinot, Andrés Rodríguez-Clare. Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the
Consequences of Globalization 197-261. [Crossref]
406. Isaac Kalonda Kanyama. 2014. Quality of institutions: Does intelligence matter?. Intelligence 42, 44-52.
[Crossref]
407. Christopher M. Meissner. Growth from Globalization? A View from the Very Long Run 1033-1069.
[Crossref]
408. Lenka Fojtíková. 2014. Performance and Growth of the Eurozone Export. Procedia Economics and
Finance 12, 154-163. [Crossref]
409. Adel Bino, Diana Abu Ghunmi, Ibrahim Qteishat. 2014. Trade, Export Capacity, and World Trade
Organization Membership: Evidence from Jordan. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 50:s1, 51-67.
[Crossref]
410. Nathan Nunn, Daniel Trefler. Domestic Institutions as a Source of Comparative Advantage 263-315.
[Crossref]
411. Philippe Aghion, Ufuk Akcigit, Peter Howitt. What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth
Theory? 515-563. [Crossref]
412. Rui Castro, Nelnan Koumtingué. 2014. On the individual optimality of economic integration. Journal
of Monetary Economics 68, 115. [Crossref]
413. Italo Colantone, Rosario Crinò. 2014. New imported inputs, new domestic products. Journal of
International Economics 92:1, 147-165. [Crossref]
414. Sheikh Shahnawaz. 2014. Trade Negotiation Capacity and Health Carve-Outs in Trade Agreements.
Economics Research International 2014, 1-4. [Crossref]
415. Kichan Nam, Hyung-Sik Nam, Dal-Won Kang. 2013. An Analysis on the Impact of Korea-Chile
FTA on Busan Port - Focusing on the Inbound Container from Chile -. Journal of Korean navigation
and port research 37:6, 681-687. [Crossref]
416. Daniel Lederman, Julián Messina, Samuel Pienknagura, Jamele Rigolini. Export Entrepreneurship
95-120. [Crossref]
417. Khuong M. Vu. 2013. Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and Singapore’s economic
growth. Information Economics and Policy 25:4, 284-300. [Crossref]
418. Kurt A. Hafner, David Mayer-Foulkes. 2013. Fertility, economic growth, and human development
causal determinants of the developed lifestyle. Journal of Macroeconomics 38, 107-120. [Crossref]
419. Roberto Ezcurra, Andrés Rodríguez-Pose. 2013. Does Economic Globalization affect Regional
Inequality? A Cross-country Analysis. World Development 52, 92-103. [Crossref]
420. Andros Kourtellos, Thanasis Stengos, Chih Ming Tan. 2013. The effect of public debt on growth in
multiple regimes. Journal of Macroeconomics 38, 35-43. [Crossref]
421. Sang Buhm Hahn. 2013. Threshold Effects of Trade Openness on Economic Growth. The Journal
of International Trade & Commerce 9:7, 81-96. [Crossref]
422. Shu-Chin Lin, Dong-Hyeon Kim, Yi-Chen Wu. 2013. FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT AND
INCOME INEQUALITY: HUMAN CAPITAL MATTERS. Journal of Regional Science 53:5,
874-896. [Crossref]
423. Francisco Rodríguez, Cameron A. Shelton. 2013. Cleaning up the kitchen sink: Specification tests
and average derivative estimators for growth econometrics. Journal of Macroeconomics 38, 260-273.
[Crossref]
424. Chee Kian Leong. 2013. Special economic zones and growth in China and India: an empirical
investigation. International Economics and Economic Policy 10:4, 549-567. [Crossref]
425. Antoni Estevadeordal, Alan M. Taylor. 2013. Is the Washington Consensus Dead? Growth, Openness,
and the Great Liberalization, 1970s–2000s. Review of Economics and Statistics 95:5, 1669-1690.
[Crossref]
426. Lirong Liu, Hiranya K. Nath. 2013. Information and Communications Technology and Trade in
Emerging Market Economies. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 49:6, 67-87. [Crossref]
427. Anshuman Sahoo, Gireesh Shrimali. 2013. The effectiveness of domestic content criteria in India's
Solar Mission. Energy Policy 62, 1470-1480. [Crossref]
428. Sebastian Voigt, Enrica De Cian, Michael Schymura, Elena Verdolini. 2013. Energy Intensity
Developments in 40 Major Economies: Structural Change or Technology Improvement?. Energy
Economics . [Crossref]
429. Lei Xia, Min Jiang. Analysis on the impact of openness and market size on economic growth 629-631.
[Crossref]
430. Mariko J. Klasing, Petros Milionis. 2013. Quantifying the evolution of world trade, 1870–1949.
Journal of International Economics . [Crossref]
431. Aleksandra Parteka. 2013. The Role of Trade in Intra-Industry Productivity Growth-the Case of Old
and New European Union Countries. Review of Development Economics 17:4, 712-731. [Crossref]
432. Stefan Voigt, Sang-min Park. 2013. Arbitration is No Substitute for State Courts. Journal of
Development Studies 49:11, 1514-1531. [Crossref]
433. Robertico Croes. 2013. Tourism specialization and economic output in small islands. Tourism Review
68:4, 34-48. [Crossref]
434. Ingrid Woolard, Murray Leibbrandt, Jane Fortson. Social Programs and Transfers: Are We Learning?
361-389. [Crossref]
435. Muhammad Shahbaz, Aviral Kumar Tiwari, Muhammad Nasir. 2013. The effects of financial
development, economic growth, coal consumption and trade openness on CO2 emissions in South
Africa. Energy Policy 61, 1452-1459. [Crossref]
436. Carlo Altomonte, Tommaso Aquilante, Gábor Békés, Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano. 2013.
Internationalization and innovation of firms: evidence and policy. Economic Policy 28:76, 663-700.
[Crossref]
437. Shawn Kantor, Price V. Fishback, John Joseph Wallis. 2013. Did the New Deal solidify the 1932
Democratic realignment?. Explorations in Economic History 50:4, 620-633. [Crossref]
438. Cullen S. Hendrix, Wendy H. Wong. 2013. Knowing your audience: How the structure of
international relations and organizational choices affect amnesty international’s advocacy. The Review
of International Organizations . [Crossref]
439. Liang-Chou Huang, Shu-Hwa Chang. 2013. Revisit the nexus of trade openness and GDP growth:
Does the financial system matter?. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 1-21.
[Crossref]
440. Jan Pettersson, Lars Johansson. 2013. Aid, Aid for Trade, and bilateral trade: An empirical study.
The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 22:6, 866-894. [Crossref]
441. Harshana Kasseeah, Vinaye Dey Ancharaz, Verena Tandrayen-Ragoobur. 2013. Access to Financing
as a Barrier to Trade: Evidence From Mauritius. Journal of African Business 14:3, 171-185. [Crossref]
442. Muhammad Shahbaz, Qazi Muhammad Adnan Hye, Aviral Kumar Tiwari, Nuno Carlos Leitão. 2013.
Economic growth, energy consumption, financial development, international trade and CO2 emissions
in Indonesia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 25, 109-121. [Crossref]
443. Jie Li. 2013. The effectiveness of fiscal and monetary policy responses to twin crises. Applied Economics
45:27, 3904-3913. [Crossref]
444. Yong He. 2013. Does China's trade expansion help African development? — an empirical estimation.
China Economic Review 26, 28-38. [Crossref]
445. Muhammad Shahbaz, Sakiru Adebola Solarin, Haider Mahmood, Mohamed Arouri. 2013. Does
financial development reduce CO2 emissions in Malaysian economy? A time series analysis. Economic
Modelling 35, 145-152. [Crossref]
446. Michael Jetter, Alex Nikolsko-Rzhevskyy, William T. Smith. 2013. The effects of wage volatility on
growth. Journal of Macroeconomics 37, 93-109. [Crossref]
447. Jan De Loecker. 2013. Detecting Learning by Exporting. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics
5:3, 1-21. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
448. X. Sala-i-Martin, A. Subramanian. 2013. Addressing the Natural Resource Curse: An Illustration
from Nigeria. Journal of African Economies 22:4, 570-615. [Crossref]
449. Niklas Potrafke. 2013. Globalization and labor market institutions: International empirical evidence.
Journal of Comparative Economics 41:3, 829-842. [Crossref]
450. David A. Fleming, David G. Abler. 2013. Does agricultural trade affect productivity? Evidence from
Chilean farms. Food Policy 41, 11-17. [Crossref]
451. Mastromarco Camilla, Laura Serlenga, Yongcheol Shin. 2013. Globalisation and technological
convergence in the EU. Journal of Productivity Analysis 40:1, 15-29. [Crossref]
452. Tran Van Hoa, Kitti Limskul. 2013. Economic impact of CO2 emissions on Thailand's growth and
climate change mitigation policy: A modelling analysis. Economic Modelling 33, 651-658. [Crossref]
453. Martin R. Goetz, Luc Laeven, Ross Levine. 2013. Identifying the Valuation Effects and Agency Costs
of Corporate Diversification: Evidence from the Geographic Diversification of U.S. Banks. Review of
Financial Studies 26:7, 1787-1823. [Crossref]
454. Alessandro Prati, Massimiliano Gaetano Onorato, Chris Papageorgiou. 2013. Which Reforms Work
and under What Institutional Environment? Evidence from a New Data Set on Structural Reforms.
Review of Economics and Statistics 95:3, 946-968. [Crossref]
455. Leila Baghdadi, Inmaculada Martinez-Zarzoso, Habib Zitouna. 2013. Are RTA agreements with
environmental provisions reducing emissions?. Journal of International Economics 90:2, 378-390.
[Crossref]
456. Marie Daumal. 2013. The Impact of Trade Openness on Regional Inequality: The Cases of India and
Brazil. The International Trade Journal 27:3, 243-280. [Crossref]
457. Andreas Billmeier, Tommaso Nannicini. 2013. Assessing Economic Liberalization Episodes: A
Synthetic Control Approach. Review of Economics and Statistics 95:3, 983-1001. [Crossref]
458. Mehmet N. Eriṣ, Bülent Ulaṣan. 2013. Trade openness and economic growth: Bayesian model
averaging estimate of cross-country growth regressions. Economic Modelling 33, 867-883. [Crossref]
459. Bart Frijns, Aaron Gilbert, Thorsten Lehnert, Alireza Tourani-Rad. 2013. Uncertainty avoidance, risk
tolerance and corporate takeover decisions. Journal of Banking & Finance 37:7, 2457-2471. [Crossref]
460. Muhammad Shahbaz. 2013. Does financial instability increase environmental degradation? Fresh
evidence from Pakistan. Economic Modelling 33, 537-544. [Crossref]
461. C. M. Buch, C. T. Koch, M. Koetter. 2013. Do Banks Benefit from Internationalization? Revisiting
the Market Power-Risk Nexus. Review of Finance 17:4, 1401-1435. [Crossref]
462. Xiao Jiang. 2013. Trade expansion and employment generation: how mercantilist does China have to
be?. International Review of Applied Economics 27:4, 557-573. [Crossref]
463. Yothin Jinjarak, Gonzalo Salinas, Yvonne M. Tsikata. 2013. The effect of World Bank trade
adjustment assistance on trade and growth, 1987–2004: Is the glass half full or half empty?. Economic
Systems . [Crossref]
464. Maria J Figueroa, Suzana Kahn Ribeiro. 2013. Energy for road passenger transport and sustainable
development: assessing policies and goals interactions. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
5:2, 152-162. [Crossref]
465. Raphael A. Auer. 2013. Geography, institutions, and the making of comparative development. Journal
of Economic Growth 18:2, 179-215. [Crossref]
466. Giuseppe Bertola, Anna Lo Prete. 2013. Finance, governments, and trade. Review of World Economics
149:2, 273-294. [Crossref]
467. Barbara Vis, Jaap Woldendorp, Hans Keman. 2013. Examining variation in economic performance
using fuzzy-sets. Quality & Quantity 47:4, 1971-1989. [Crossref]
468. Yothin Jinjarak. 2013. Economic integration and government revenue from financial repression.
Economic Systems 37:2, 271-283. [Crossref]
469. Sucharita Ghosh, Camilla Mastromarco. 2013. Cross-border Economic Activities, Human Capital and
Efficiency: A Stochastic Frontier Analysis for OECD Countries. The World Economy 36:6, 761-785.
[Crossref]
470. Yessengali Oskenbayev, Mesut Yilmaz, Kanat Abdulla. 2013. Resource concentration, institutional
quality and the natural resource curse. Economic Systems 37:2, 254-270. [Crossref]
471. Sanne Hiller. 2013. Does immigrant employment matter for export sales? Evidence from Denmark.
Review of World Economics 149:2, 369-394. [Crossref]
472. Aleksandra Parteka, Massimo Tamberi. 2013. What Determines Export Diversification in the
Development Process? Empirical Assessment. The World Economy 36:6, 807-826. [Crossref]
473. Håvard Hegre, Joakim Karlsen, Håvard Mokleiv Nygård, Håvard Strand, Henrik Urdal. 2013.
Predicting Armed Conflict, 2010-2050 1. International Studies Quarterly 57:2, 250-270. [Crossref]
474. Josef C. Brada. 2013. The distribution of income between labor and capital is not stable: But why is
that so and why does it matter?. Economic Systems . [Crossref]
475. Fabio Cerina, Francesco Mureddu. 2013. Structural Change and Growth in a NEG Model. Review of
Development Economics 17:2, 182-200. [Crossref]
476. Soo Eun, Kim, Young Jun Choi. 2013. Vertical Specialization and Industrial GDP Growth in Korea.
The Journal of International Trade & Commerce 9:2, 221-247. [Crossref]
477. Mona Haddad, Jamus Jerome Lim, Cosimo Pancaro, Christian Saborowski. 2013. Trade openness
reduces growth volatility when countries are well diversified. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue
canadienne d'économique 46:2, 765-790. [Crossref]
478. Daniel Oto-Peralías, Diego Romero-Ávila. 2013. Tracing the Link between Government Size and
Growth: The Role of Public Sector Quality. Kyklos 66:2, 229-255. [Crossref]
479. Nuno Torres, Oscar Afonso, Isabel Soares. 2013. Natural Resources, Wage Growth and Institutions
- a Panel Approach. The World Economy 36:5, 661-687. [Crossref]
480. Jonathan Munemo. 2013. Examining Imports of Capital Goods From China as a Channel for
Technology Transfer and Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of African Business 14:2, 106-116.
[Crossref]
481. Antonio Fatás, Ilian Mihov. 2013. Policy Volatility, Institutions, and Economic Growth. Review of
Economics and Statistics 95:2, 362-376. [Crossref]
482. M. Shahe Emran, Zhaoyang Hou. 2013. Access to Markets and Rural Poverty: Evidence from
Household Consumption in China. Review of Economics and Statistics 95:2, 682-697. [Crossref]
483. Volker Grossmann. 2013. Structural Change, Urban Congestion, and the End of Growth. Review of
Development Economics 17:2, 165-181. [Crossref]
484. Andrew J. Nelson, Edmund J. Zolnik. 2013. Regional Effects of Trade on Income. Regional Studies
47:5, 740-755. [Crossref]
485. Arpita Ghose, Chandrima Chakraborti. 2013. The Relative Role of Imports and Exports in Explaining
Productivity of Indian Bio-Pharmaceutical Firms: Evidence from Non Parametric Data Envelopment
Analysis. Foreign Trade Review 48:2, 165-201. [Crossref]
486. Samuel Bazzi,, Michael A. Clemens. 2013. Blunt Instruments: Avoiding Common Pitfalls in
Identifying the Causes of Economic Growth. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 5:2,
152-186. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
487. Jeremy C. Goh, Fuwei Jiang, Jun Tu, Yuchen Wang. 2013. Can US economic variables predict the
Chinese stock market?. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal 22, 69-87. [Crossref]
488. Faqin Lin, Nicholas C.S. Sim. 2013. Trade, income and the Baltic Dry Index. European Economic
Review 59, 1-18. [Crossref]
489. Dierk Herzer. 2013. Cross-Country Heterogeneity and the Trade-Income Relationship. World
Development 44, 194-211. [Crossref]
490. JAMES B. ANG, JAKOB B. MADSEN. 2013. INTERNATIONAL R&D SPILLOVERS AND
PRODUCTIVITY TRENDS IN THE ASIAN MIRACLE ECONOMIES. Economic Inquiry 51:2,
1523-1541. [Crossref]
491. Vadym Volosovych. 2013. Risk sharing from international factor income: explaining cross-country
differences. Applied Economics 45:11, 1435-1459. [Crossref]
492. S. Brock Blomberg, Ricardo Fernholz, John-Clark Levin. 2013. Terrorism and the Invisible Hook.
Southern Economic Journal 79:4, 849-863. [Crossref]
493. Mohsen Bahmani-Oskooee, Shady Kholdy, Ahmad Sohrabian. 2013. Do MNCs spur financial
markets in corrupt host countries?. Journal of Economics and Finance 37:2, 308-317. [Crossref]
494. Dong-Hyeon Kim, Shu-Chin Lin, Yu-Bo Suen. 2013. Investment, trade openness and foreign
direct investment: Social capability matters. International Review of Economics & Finance 26, 56-69.
[Crossref]
495. Arno Tausch, Almas Heshmati. 2013. Worker remittances and the global preconditions of ‘smart
development’. Society and Economy 35:1, 25-50. [Crossref]
496. Rob Clark, Matthew C. Mahutga. 2013. Explaining the trade-growth link: Assessing diffusion-based
and structure-based models of exchange. Social Science Research 42:2, 401-417. [Crossref]
497. Aleksandra Parteka, Joanna Wolszczak-Derlacz. 2013. The Impact of Trade Integration with the
European Union on Productivity in a Posttransition Economy: The Case of Polish Manufacturing
Sectors. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 49:2, 84-104. [Crossref]
498. Ilhan Ozturk, Ali Acaravci. 2013. The long-run and causal analysis of energy, growth, openness and
financial development on carbon emissions in Turkey. Energy Economics 36, 262-267. [Crossref]
499. Doron Lavee, Gilat Beniad, Moran Moshe-Jantzis. 2013. Israel's foreign trade policy: The benefits
of its reform. Journal of Policy Modeling 35:2, 255-270. [Crossref]
500. Christine Kalenborn, Christian Lessmann. 2013. The impact of democracy and press freedom on
corruption: Conditionality matters. Journal of Policy Modeling . [Crossref]
501. Andreas Löschel, Sascha Rexhäuser, Michael Schymura. 2013. Trade and the environment: An
application of the WIOD database. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment 11:1,
51-61. [Crossref]
502. Raja Kali, Javier Reyes, Joshua McGee, Stuart Shirrell. 2013. Growth networks. Journal of Development
Economics 101, 216-227. [Crossref]
503. Qichun He. 2013. Price Scissors and Economic Growth: The Role of Openness. Pacific Economic
Review 18:1, 60-78. [Crossref]
504. Gabriel Felbermayr, Jasmin Gröschl. 2013. Natural disasters and the effect of trade on income: A new
panel IV approach. European Economic Review 58, 18-30. [Crossref]
505. Claudia M. Buch, Martin Schlotter. 2013. Regional origins of employment volatility: evidence from
German states. Empirica 40:1, 1-19. [Crossref]
506. Yanling Wang. 2013. Exposure to FDI and new plant survival: evidence in Canada. Canadian Journal
of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique 46:1, 46-77. [Crossref]
507. Theo S. Eicher, Monique Newiak. 2013. Intellectual property rights as development determinants.
Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique 46:1, 4-22. [Crossref]
508. Panagiotis Petrakis, Pantelis Kostis. 2013. Economic growth and cultural change. The Journal of Socio-
Economics . [Crossref]
509. Koyin Chang, Yoonbai Kim, Marc Tomljanovich, Yung-Hsiang Ying. 2013. Do political parties foster
business cycles? An examination of developed economies. Journal of Comparative Economics 41:1,
212-226. [Crossref]
510. JENNY MINIER, BULENT UNEL. 2013. WHEN IS TRADE PROTECTION GOOD FOR
GROWTH?. Economic Inquiry 51:1, 62-71. [Crossref]
511. David H. Bearce, Steven E. Finkel, Anibal S. Pérez-Liñán, Juan Rodríguez-Zepeda, Lena Surzhko-
Harned. 2013. Has the New Aid for Trade Agenda been Export Effective? Evidence on the Impact of
US AfT Allocations 1999-2008 1. International Studies Quarterly no-no. [Crossref]
512. David G. Tarr. Putting Services and Foreign Direct Investment with Endogenous Productivity Effects
in Computable General Equilibrium Models 303-377. [Crossref]
513. A. A. Levchenko. 2013. International Trade and Institutional Change. Journal of Law, Economics,
and Organization 29:5, 1145. [Crossref]
514. P. J. Patterson. Globalization and the Economic Partnership Agreement 1-25. [Crossref]
515. Warwick J. McKibbin, Peter J. Wilcoxen. A Global Approach to Energy and  the  Environment
995-1068. [Crossref]
516. Sebastián Castillo Juan, Aguilera Esther, García Cortijo Carmen. 2013. Centroamérica: lo
impostergable de una diversificación comercial coherente. Problemas del Desarrollo 44:174, 119-138.
[Crossref]
517. Abdoul' Ganiou Mijiyawa. 2013. Africa's Recent Economic Growth: What Are the Contributing
Factors?. African Development Review 25:3, 289. [Crossref]
518. Eleanor Doyle, Fergal O’Connor. 2013. Innovation capacities in advanced economies: Relative
performance of small open economies. Research in International Business and Finance 27:1, 106-123.
[Crossref]
519. Roberto Álvarez, Sebastián Vergara. 2013. Trade exposure, survival and growth of small and medium-
size firms. International Review of Economics & Finance 25, 185-201. [Crossref]
520. Richard L. Bernal. How the EPA Promotes Economic Development 119-164. [Crossref]
521. Harald Badinger. 2013. Measuring the World Economy. The World Economy 36:1, 12-30. [Crossref]
522. Elena Horská, Luboš Smutka, Mansoor Maitah. 2013. The impacts of the global economic crisis on
selected segments of the world trade in commodities. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae
Mendelianae Brunensis 60:7, 101-110. [Crossref]
523. Minh Quang Dao. 2013. The Role of Policy Fundamentals in Fostering Economic Growth in
Developing Countries. Modern Economy 04:11, 706-711. [Crossref]
524. Bassem Kahouli, Noureddine Kadhraoui. 2012. Consolidation of Regional Groupings and Economic
Growth: Empirical Investigation by Panel Data. International Journal of Euro-Mediterranean Studies
5:1, 71-92. [Crossref]
525. Michael M. Bechtel, Thomas Bernauer, Reto Meyer. 2012. The green side of protectionism:
Environmental concerns and three facets of trade policy preferences. Review of International Political
Economy 19:5, 837-866. [Crossref]
526. José Villaverde, Adolfo Maza. 2012. Chinese per Capita Income Distribution, 1992-2007: A Regional
Perspective. Asian Economic Journal 26:4, 313-331. [Crossref]
527. Claudia R. Williamson. 2012. Dignity and development. The Journal of Socio-Economics 41:6,
763-771. [Crossref]
528. Olivier Peron, Serge Rey. 2012. Trade and convergence of per capita income in the Indian Ocean Zone,
1950–2008. The Annals of Regional Science 49:3, 657-683. [Crossref]
529. Volker Grossmann, David Stadelmann. 2012. Does High-skilled Migration Affect Publicly Financed
Investments?. Review of International Economics 20:5, 944-959. [Crossref]
530. Rod Falvey, Neil Foster, David Greenaway. 2012. Trade Liberalization, Economic Crises, and Growth.
World Development 40:11, 2177-2193. [Crossref]
531. Muhammad Shahbaz. 2012. Does trade openness affect long run growth? Cointegration, causality
and forecast error variance decomposition tests for Pakistan. Economic Modelling 29:6, 2325-2339.
[Crossref]
532. ALMAS HESHMATI, SUN PENG. 2012. INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND ITS EFFECTS
ON ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE IN CHINA. China Economic Policy Review 01:02, 1250009.
[Crossref]
533. Kozo Kiyota. 2012. Trade liberalization, economic growth, and income distribution in a multiple-cone
neoclassical growth model. Oxford Economic Papers 64:4, 655-674. [Crossref]
534. Roberto Ezcurra. 2012. Is There a Link between Globalization and Governance?. Environment and
Planning C: Government and Policy 30:5, 848-870. [Crossref]
535. M. Adetunji Babatunde, Olugboyega A. Oyeranti, Abiodun S. Bankole, E. Olawale Ogunkola. 2012.
Exports trade, employment and poverty reduction in Nigeria. International Journal of Social Economics
39:11, 875-899. [Crossref]
536. Jiansuo Pei, Jan Oosterhaven, Erik Dietzenbacher. 2012. HOW MUCH DO EXPORTS
CONTRIBUTE TO CHINA'S INCOME GROWTH?. Economic Systems Research 24:3, 275-297.
[Crossref]
537. Christian Lessmann, Gunther Markwardt. 2012. Aid, Growth and Devolution. World Development
40:9, 1723-1749. [Crossref]
538. Mark Dincecco, Mauricio Prado. 2012. Warfare, fiscal capacity, and performance. Journal of Economic
Growth 17:3, 171-203. [Crossref]
539. Kenneth R. Ahern, Daniele Daminelli, Cesare Fracassi. 2012. Lost in translation? The effect of
cultural values on mergers around the world. Journal of Financial Economics . [Crossref]
540. Adrian Boos, Karin Holm-Müller. 2012. A theoretical overview of the relationship between the
resource curse and genuine savings as an indicator for “weak” sustainability. Natural Resources Forum
36:3, 145-159. [Crossref]
541. David J. Balan, Stephen Knack. 2012. The correlation between human capital and morality and
its effect on economic performance: Theory and evidence. Journal of Comparative Economics 40:3,
457-475. [Crossref]
542. Markus Eberhardt, Francis Teal. 2012. No Mangoes in the Tundra: Spatial Heterogeneity in
Agricultural Productivity Analysis*. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics no-no. [Crossref]
543. Camilla Mastromarco, Laura Serlenga, Yongcheol Shin. 2012. Is Globalization Driving Efficiency?
A Threshold Stochastic Frontier Panel Data Modeling Approach. Review of International Economics
20:3, 563-579. [Crossref]
544. Rodolphe Desbordes, Vincenzo Verardi. 2012. Refitting the Kuznets curve. Economics Letters 116:2,
258-261. [Crossref]
545. Dong-Hyeon Kim, Shu-Chin Lin, Yu-Bo Suen. 2012. The simultaneous evolution of economic
growth, financial development, and trade openness. The Journal of International Trade & Economic
Development 21:4, 513-537. [Crossref]
546. STEPHEN B. BILLINGS, J. SCOTT HOLLADAY. 2012. SHOULD CITIES GO FOR THE
GOLD? THE LONG-TERM IMPACTS OF HOSTING THE OLYMPICS. Economic Inquiry
50:3, 754-772. [Crossref]
547. Tay-Cheng Ma,. 2012. Institutions, Antitrust Effectiveness, and Market Competition: Empirical
Evidence from Cross-Country Variations. Applied Economics Quarterly 58:3, 223-262. [Crossref]
548. Jung Hur, Cheolbeom Park. 2012. Do Free Trade Agreements Increase Economic Growth of the
Member Countries?. World Development 40:7, 1283-1294. [Crossref]
549. Jørn Rattsø, Hildegunn E. Stokke. 2012. Trade policy in a growth model with technology gap
dynamics and simulations for South Africa. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 36:7,
1042-1056. [Crossref]
550. Dawood Mamoon. 2012. Economic security, well functioning courts and a good government.
International Journal of Social Economics 39:8, 587-611. [Crossref]
551. Mehmet Huseyin Bilgin, Chi Keung Marco Lau, Gokhan Karabulut. 2012. Technology transfer and
enterprise performance: a firm-level analysis in China. Journal of Business Economics and Management
13:3, 489-498. [Crossref]
552. J. de Sousa, J. Lochard. 2012. Trade and Colonial Status. Journal of African Economies 21:3, 409-439.
[Crossref]
553. Michael A. Clemens, Steven Radelet, Rikhil R. Bhavnani, Samuel Bazzi. 2012. Counting Chickens
when they Hatch: Timing and the Effects of Aid on Growth*. The Economic Journal 122:561,
590-617. [Crossref]
554. Ridha Nouira, Khalid Sekkat. 2012. Desperately seeking the positive impact of undervaluation on
growth. Journal of Macroeconomics 34:2, 537-552. [Crossref]
555. Chun-Ping Chang, Chien-Chiang Lee. 2012. Partisanship and international trade: Some international
evidence. Acta Oeconomica 62:1, 41-63. [Crossref]
556. THUTO BOTLHOLE, JOHN ASAFU-ADJAYE, FABRIZIO CARMIGNANI. 2012. NATURAL
RESOURCE ABUNDANCE, INSTITUTIONS AND TAX REVENUE MOBILISATION IN
SUB-SAHARA AFRICA. South African Journal of Economics 80:2, 135-156. [Crossref]
557. Yanling Wang. 2012. Openness and Productivity: The Role of Imports, FDI and International
Telecommunications. Latin American Journal of Economics 49:1, 125-145. [Crossref]
558. Antonio N. Bojanic. 2012. THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TRADE ON
THE ECONOMIC GROWTH OF BOLIVIA. Journal of Applied Economics 15:1, 51-70. [Crossref]
559. Gouranga Gopal Das. 2012. Globalization, socio-institutional factors and North–South knowledge
diffusion: Role of India and China as Southern growth progenitors. Technological Forecasting and
Social Change 79:4, 620-637. [Crossref]
560. Amir Shoham. 2012. Managing multinational corporations through compensation: The risk-sharing
contract method. Journal of Economics and Business 64:3, 231-239. [Crossref]
561. Christopher J. Coyne, Claudia R. Williamson. 2012. Trade openness and cultural creative destruction.
Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy 1:1, 22-49. [Crossref]
562. C. K. Yoo, M. Gopinath, H. Kim. 2012. Trade Policy Reform, Productivity Growth and Welfare in
South Korean Agriculture. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy . [Crossref]
563. Scott Gehlbach, Philip Keefer. 2012. Private Investment and the Institutionalization of Collective
Action in Autocracies: Ruling Parties and Legislatures. The Journal of Politics 1-15. [Crossref]
564. Jamus Jerome Lim, Christian Saborowski. 2012. Export diversification in a transitioning economy.
Economics of Transition 20:2, 339-367. [Crossref]
565. Nuno Torres, Oscar Afonso, Isabel Soares. 2012. Oil Abundance and Economic Growth--A Panel
Data Analysis. The Energy Journal 33:2. . [Crossref]
566. Nathan Perry, Carlos Schönerwald. 2012. Institutions, Geography, and Terms of Trade in Latin
America. International Journal of Political Economy 41:1, 66-94. [Crossref]
567. Anna Lo Prete. 2012. Current account imbalances, trade and finance. Applied Economics Letters 19:4,
399-402. [Crossref]
568. A. Ickowitz. 2012. Wealthiest Is Not Always Healthiest: What Explains Differences in Child Mortality
in West Africa?. Journal of African Economies 21:2, 192-227. [Crossref]
569. Oscar Bajo-Rubio, Carmen Díaz-Roldán. 2012. Do exports cause growth? Some evidence for the new
EU members. Post-Communist Economies 24:1, 125-131. [Crossref]
570. João Tovar Jalles. 2012. Openness, Regional Trade Agreements and Growth: Evidence from Asia*.
Asian Economic Journal 26:1, 63-85. [Crossref]
571. Sytske F. Groenewald, Marrit M. Van Den Berg. 2012. Smallholder Livelihood Adaptation in the
Context of Neoliberal Policy Reforms: A Case of Maize Farmers in Southern Veracruz, Mexico. Journal
of Development Studies 48:3, 429-444. [Crossref]
572. Nisha Mukherjee, Jonathan Krieckhaus. 2012. Globalization and human well-being. International
Political Science Review 33:2, 150-170. [Crossref]
573. Dawood Mamoon, Syed Mansoob Murshed. 2012. Education bias of trade liberalization and wage
inequality in developing countries. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 1-33.
[Crossref]
574. Margherita Comola. 2012. Democracies, Politics, and Arms Supply. Review of International Economics
20:1, 150-163. [Crossref]
575. Benno Ferrarini. 2012. International trade, domestic market potential and income in developing Asia.
Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy 17:1, 127-137. [Crossref]
576. Alexandre Dmitriev. 2012. Institutions and growth: evidence from estimation methods robust to weak
instruments. Applied Economics 1-11. [Crossref]
577. Robert M. Anthony, Edward M. Crenshaw. 2012. National States and Global Markets: Is There
a Prima Facie Case for Neoliberal Policies in the Developing World?. Comparative Sociology 11:2,
227-250. [Crossref]
578. Bülent Ulaşan. 2012. Cross-Country Growth Empirics and Model Uncertainty: An Overview.
Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal 6:2012-16, 1. [Crossref]
579. Akinori Tomohara. Inward FDI and the Size of the Market: Hosting MNCs or Promoting Domestic
Companies? 157-171. [Crossref]
580. C. De lucia, B. Datta. Socio-economic, environmental, and policy perspectives of advanced biodiesel
production 32-68. [Crossref]
581. Marc Keuschnigg, Jochen Groß. 193-226. [Crossref]
582. Benedikt Heid, Mario Larch. 2012. Migration, Trade and Unemployment. Economics: The Open-
Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal 6:2012-4, 1. [Crossref]
583. Younkyoo Kimj, Jae-Hyung Lee. 2012. A Sensitivity Analysis Regarding the Impacts of Trade
Openness and Globalization Growth: Empirical Evidence from Korea. Journal of International Logistics
and Trade 10:2, 47. [Crossref]
584. Assandé Désiré Adom. 2012. Investigating the Impacts of Intraregional Trade and Aid on Per
Capita Income in Africa: Case Study of the ECOWAS. Economics Research International 2012, 1-15.
[Crossref]
585. Charalambos G. Tsangarides. 2012. Determinants of Growth Spells: Is Africa Different?. IMF
Working Papers 12:227, 1. [Crossref]
586. Luc Laeven, Martin R. Goetz, Ross Levine. 2012. The Valuation Effects of Geographic
Diversification: Evidence From U.S. Banks. IMF Working Papers 12:50, 1. [Crossref]
587. William MILBERG, Deborah WINKLER. 2011. Progrès économique et social dans les réseaux de
production mondiaux: problèmes de théorie et de mesure. Revue internationale du Travail 150:3-4,
373-399. [Crossref]
588. R. Ezcurra, A. Rodriguez-Pose. 2011. Decentralization of Social Protection Expenditure and
Economic Growth in the OECD. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 41:1, 146-157. [Crossref]
589. William MILBERG, Deborah WINKLER. 2011. Economic and social upgrading in global production
networks: Problems of theory and measurement. International Labour Review 150:3-4, 341-365.
[Crossref]
590. Muhammad Nawaz, Muhammad Nasir, Amanat Ali, Waheed Chaudhry. 2011. Trade Liberalization
and Child Labor: A Case Study of Pakistan. Transition Studies Review 18:2, 361-376. [Crossref]
591. William MILBERG, Deborah WINKLER. 2011. Progreso económico y social en las redes productivas
mundiales. Problemas teóricos y de medición. Revista Internacional del Trabajo 130:3-4, 375-401.
[Crossref]
592. Fabrizio Carmignani. 2011. The Making of Pro-Poor Growth. Scottish Journal of Political Economy
58:5, 656-684. [Crossref]
593. Anne Margrethe Brigham. 2011. Agricultural Exports and Food Insecurity in Sub-Saharan Africa: A
Qualititative Configurational Analysis. Development Policy Review 29:6, 729-748. [Crossref]
594. Hatra Voghouei, M. Azali, Mohammad Ali Jamali. 2011. A survey of the determinants of financial
development. Asian-Pacific Economic Literature 25:2, 1-20. [Crossref]
595. Andrzej Cieślik, Monika Tarsalewska. 2011. External Openness and Economic Growth in Developing
Countries. Review of Development Economics 15:4, 729-744. [Crossref]
596. Flávio Vieira, Ronald MacDonald, Aderbal Damasceno. 2011. The role of institutions in cross-section
income and panel data growth models: A deeper investigation on the weakness and proliferation of
instruments. Journal of Comparative Economics . [Crossref]
597. Jay Squalli, Kenneth Wilson. 2011. A New Measure of Trade Openness. The World Economy 34:10,
1745-1770. [Crossref]
598. Astghik Mavisakalyan. 2011. Immigration, Public Education Spending, and Private Schooling.
Southern Economic Journal 78:2, 397-423. [Crossref]
599. Michael Bleaney, Arcangelo Dimico. 2011. Biogeographical conditions, the transition to agriculture
and long-run growth. European Economic Review 55:7, 943-954. [Crossref]
600. Peter A. G. Bergeijk, Fabienne Fortanier, Harry Garretsen, Henri L. F. Groot, Selwyn J. V. Moons.
2011. Productivity and Internationalization: A Micro-Data Approach. De Economist . [Crossref]
601. Gerrit Faber, Michiel Gerritse. 2011. Foreign determinants of local institutions: Spatial dependence
and openness. European Journal of Political Economy . [Crossref]
602. Jorge Tovar. 2011. Consumers’ Welfare and Trade Liberalization: Evidence from the Car Industry in
Colombia. World Development . [Crossref]
603. Christopher Balding. 2011. A re-examination of the relation between democracy and international
trade. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 20:5, 585-603. [Crossref]
604. Dong-Hyeon Kim. 2011. Trade, growth and income. The Journal of International Trade & Economic
Development 20:5, 677-709. [Crossref]
605. Maria E. de Boyrie, Roger Johns. 2011. The effects of trade agreements on the growth of major Latin
American economies. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 1-22. [Crossref]
606. Chun-Chieh Wang. 2011. Aid for trade as a public good. The Journal of International Trade &
Economic Development 1-18. [Crossref]
607. Anwesha Aditya, Rajat Acharyya. 2011. Export diversification, composition, and economic growth:
Evidence from cross-country analysis. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development
1-34. [Crossref]
608. Patrik Guggenberger. 2011. ON THE ASYMPTOTIC SIZE DISTORTION OF TESTS WHEN
INSTRUMENTS LOCALLY VIOLATE THE EXOGENEITY ASSUMPTION. Econometric
Theory 1-35. [Crossref]
609. Tarlok Singh. Does International Trade Cause Economic Growth? A Survey 176-222. [Crossref]
610. Dong-Hyeon Kim, Shu-Chin Lin, Yu-Bo Suen. 2011. INTERACTIONS BETWEEN
FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TRADE OPENNESS. Scottish Journal of Political Economy
58:4, 567-588. [Crossref]
611. Ling T. He. 2011. A Note on Impacts of International Trade on Economic Growth and Inflation.
The International Trade Journal 25:4, 418-432. [Crossref]
612. Pierluigi Montalbano. 2011. Trade Openness and Developing Countries’ Vulnerability: Concepts,
Misconceptions, and Directions for Research. World Development 39:9, 1489-1502. [Crossref]
613. Jonathan Perraton. 2011. Explaining growth? The case of the trade–growth relationship. Journal of
Economic Methodology 18:3, 283-296. [Crossref]
614. Steven Yamarik, Sucharita Ghosh. 2011. Is natural openness or trade policy good for the environment?.
Environment and Development Economics 1-28. [Crossref]
615. Rabah Arezki, Frederick van der Ploeg. 2011. Do Natural Resources Depress Income Per Capita?.
Review of Development Economics 15:3, 504-521. [Crossref]
616. G. Vannoorenberghe. 2011. Firm-level volatility and exports. Journal of International Economics .
[Crossref]
617. Claudio Bravo-Ortega, Álvaro García Marín. 2011. R&D and Productivity: A Two Way Avenue?.
World Development 39:7, 1090-1107. [Crossref]
618. Alessia Lo Turco, Aleksandra Parteka. 2011. The demand for skills and labour costs in partner
countries. Economics of Transition 19:3, 611-637. [Crossref]
619. José Antonio Alonso. 2011. Colonisation, Institutions and Development: New Evidence. Journal of
Development Studies 47:7, 937-958. [Crossref]
620. J. Samson, D. Berteaux, B. J. McGill, M. M. Humphries. 2011. Geographic disparities and moral
hazards in the predicted impacts of climate change on human populations. Global Ecology and
Biogeography 20:4, 532-544. [Crossref]
621. Dursun Peksen. 2011. Foreign military intervention and women’s rights. Journal of Peace Research
48:4, 455-468. [Crossref]
622. Philip Sauré. 2011. Bounded Love of Variety and Patterns of Trade. Open Economies Review . [Crossref]
623. Frederick van der Ploeg. 2011. Natural Resources: Curse or Blessing?. Journal of Economic Literature
49:2, 366-420. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
624. Arne Bigsten, Måns Söderbom. 2011. Industrial Strategies for Economic Recovery and Long-term
Growth in Africa*. African Development Review 23:2, 161-171. [Crossref]
625. José Villaverde, Adolfo Maza. 2011. Globalisation, Growth and Convergence. The World Economy
34:6, 952-971. [Crossref]
626. HOUSSEM EDDINE CHEBBI, MARCELO OLARREAGA, HABIB ZITOUNA. 2011. TRADE
OPENNESS AND CO 2 EMISSIONS IN TUNISIA. Middle East Development Journal 03:01, 29-53.
[Crossref]
627. Ola Olsson, Gustav Hansson. 2011. Country size and the rule of law: Resuscitating Montesquieu.
European Economic Review 55:5, 613-629. [Crossref]
628. Pavlos C. Symeou. 2011. Economy size and performance: An efficiency analysis in the
telecommunications sector. Telecommunications Policy 35:5, 426-440. [Crossref]
629. Borja Larrain. 2011. World Betas, Consumption Growth, and Financial Integration. Journal of
International Money and Finance . [Crossref]
630. Miriam Bruhn, Francisco A. Gallego. 2011. Good, Bad, and Ugly Colonial Activities: Do They Matter
for Economic Development?. Review of Economics and Statistics 120224102436000. [Crossref]
631. B. Bhaskara Rao, Krishna Chaitanya Vadlamannati. 2011. Globalization and growth in the low income
African countries with the extreme bounds analysis. Economic Modelling 28:3, 795-805. [Crossref]
632. Pelle Ahlerup, Gustav Hansson. 2011. Nationalism and government effectiveness. Journal of
Comparative Economics . [Crossref]
633. Dong-Hyeon Kim, Shu-Chin Lin, Yu-Bo Suen. 2011. Nonlinearity between Trade Openness and
Economic Development. Review of Development Economics 15:2, 279-292. [Crossref]
634. Roselyne Joyeux, Ronald D. Ripple. 2011. Energy Consumption and Real Income: A Panel
Cointegration Multi-country Study. The Energy Journal 32:2. . [Crossref]
635. Alberto Alesina, William Easterly, Janina Matuszeski. 2011. ARTIFICIAL STATES. Journal of the
European Economic Association 9:2, 246-277. [Crossref]
636. Yue-Jun Zhang. 2011. The impact of financial development on carbon emissions: An empirical
analysis in China. Energy Policy 39:4, 2197-2203. [Crossref]
637. Fabrizio Carmignani, Emilio Colombo, Patrizio Tirelli. 2011. Macroeconomic risk and the
(de)stabilising role of government size. European Journal of Political Economy . [Crossref]
638. Abdul Jalil, Mete Feridun. 2011. The impact of growth, energy and financial development on the
environment in China: A cointegration analysis. Energy Economics 33:2, 284-291. [Crossref]
639. Keyong-Seog Song. 2011. An Analysis on Channels of Korean Export-led Economic Growth Strategy.
The Journal of International Trade & Commerce 7:1, 81-100. [Crossref]
640. Jacob Dearmon, Robin Grier. 2011. Trust and the accumulation of physical and human capital.
European Journal of Political Economy . [Crossref]
641. R. Gaston Gelos, Ratna Sahay, Guido Sandleris. 2011. Sovereign borrowing by developing countries:
What determines market access?. Journal of International Economics 83:2, 243-254. [Crossref]
642. Gabriel Felbermayr, Julien Prat, Hans-Jörg Schmerer. 2011. Trade and unemployment: What do the
data say?. European Economic Review . [Crossref]
643. Jim Lee. 2011. Export specialization and economic growth around the world. Economic Systems 35:1,
45-63. [Crossref]
644. R. J. Singh, M. Haacker, K.-w. Lee, M. Le Goff. 2011. Determinants and Macroeconomic Impact
of Remittances in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of African Economies 20:2, 312-340. [Crossref]
645. RUHUL A. SALIM, MOHAMMAD A. HOSSAIN. 2011. THE LINKAGE BETWEEN
EXPORT AND INCOME: FURTHER EVIDENCE FROM BANGLADESH. The Singapore
Economic Review 56:01, 79-95. [Crossref]
646. Thomas Barnebeck Andersen, Carl-Johan Dalgaard. 2011. Flows of people, flows of ideas, and the
inequality of nations. Journal of Economic Growth . [Crossref]
647. Moritz Schularick, Solomos Solomou. 2011. Tariffs and economic growth in the first era of
globalization. Journal of Economic Growth . [Crossref]
648. Oded Galor. 2011. The demographic transition: causes and consequences. Cliometrica . [Crossref]
649. Martin Gassebner, Noel Gaston, Michael J. Lamla. 2011. THE INVERSE DOMINO EFFECT:
ARE ECONOMIC REFORMS CONTAGIOUS?*. International Economic Review 52:1, 183-200.
[Crossref]
650. B. Bhaskara Rao, Artur Tamazian, Krishna Chaitanya Vadlamannati. 2011. Growth effects of a
comprehensive measure of globalization with country-specific time series data. Applied Economics 43:5,
551-568. [Crossref]
651. Tommaso Nannicini, Andreas Billmeier. 2011. Economies in Transition: How Important Is Trade
Openness for Growth?*. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics no-no. [Crossref]
652. Mark J. Roe, Jordan I. Siegel. 2011. Political instability: Effects on financial development, roots in
the severity of economic inequality. Journal of Comparative Economics . [Crossref]
653. Indra de Soysa, Krishna Chaitanya Vadlamannati. 2011. Does Being Bound Together Suffocate, or
Liberate? The Effects of Economic, Social, and Political Globalization on Human Rights, 1981-2005.
Kyklos 64:1, 20-53. [Crossref]
654. Masami Imai,, Seitaro Takarabe. 2011. Bank Integration and Transmission of Financial Shocks:
Evidence from Japan. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 3:1, 155-183. [Abstract] [View
PDF article] [PDF with links]
655. Hsiao-Tien Pao, Chung-Ming Tsai. 2011. Multivariate Granger causality between CO2 emissions,
energy consumption, FDI (foreign direct investment) and GDP (gross domestic product): Evidence
from a panel of BRIC (Brazil, Russian Federation, India, and China) countries. Energy 36:1, 685-693.
[Crossref]
656. Ramón María-Dolores, José Miguel Martínez-Carrión. 2011. The relationship between height and
economic development in Spain, 1850–1958☆. Economics & Human Biology 9:1, 30-44. [Crossref]
657. Marilyne Huchet-Bourdon, Angela Cheptea. 2011. Informal barriers and agricultural trade: does
monetary integration matter?. Agricultural Economics no-no. [Crossref]
658. Eleanor Doyle, Inmaculada Martinez-Zarzoso. 2011. Productivity, Trade, and Institutional Quality:
A Panel Analysis. Southern Economic Journal 77:3, 726-752. [Crossref]
659. Dong-Hyeon Kim, Shu-Chin Lin. 2011. Trade and income at different stages of economic
development. Applied Economics 1-13. [Crossref]
660. Raghuram G. Rajan, Arvind Subramanian. 2011. Aid, Dutch disease, and manufacturing growth.
Journal of Development Economics 94:1, 106-118. [Crossref]
661. PHILIP SHAW, MARINA-SELINI KATSAITI, MARIUS JURGILAS. 2011. CORRUPTION
AND GROWTH UNDER WEAK IDENTIFICATION. Economic Inquiry 49:1, 264-275. [Crossref]
662. Maria Jesus Herrerias, Vicente Orts. 2011. The driving forces behind China’s growth1. Economics of
Transition 19:1, 79-124. [Crossref]
663. Sana El Harbi, Gilles Grolleau, Insaf Bekir. Chapter 4 Entrepreneurship and Growth: What Causes
What? 73-91. [Crossref]
664. Muhammad Shahbaz, Naveed Aamir, Muhammad Shahbaz Shabir. 2011. Financial Development,
Openness Relation and the Role of Financial Institutions: A Case of Pakistan. Asia Pacific Business
Review 7:1, 33-49. [Crossref]
665. Hakan Yilmazkuday. 2011. Thresholds in the Finance-Growth Nexus: A Cross-Country Analysis.
The World Bank Economic Review 25:2, 278-295. [Crossref]
666. Timothy J. Kehoe,, Kim J. Ruhl. 2010. Why Have Economic Reforms in Mexico Not Generated
Growth?. Journal of Economic Literature 48:4, 1005-1027. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with
links]
667. Gilles Dufrenot, Valerie Mignon, Charalambos Tsangarides. 2010. The trade-growth nexus in the
developing countries: a quantile regression approach. Review of World Economics 146:4, 731-761.
[Crossref]
668. James Fenske. 2010. THE CAUSAL HISTORY OF AFRICA: A RESPONSE TO HOPKINS.
Economic History of Developing Regions 25:2, 177-212. [Crossref]
669. Miao Wang. 2010. Foreign direct investment and domestic investment in the host country: evidence
from panel study. Applied Economics 42:29, 3711-3721. [Crossref]
670. B. Bhaskara Rao, Rup Singh. 2010. Effects of trade openness on the steady-state growth rates
of selected Asian countries with an extended exogenous growth model. Applied Economics 42:29,
3693-3702. [Crossref]
671. Marc Suhrcke, Dieter Urban. 2010. Are cardiovascular diseases bad for economic growth?. Health
Economics 19:12, 1478-1496. [Crossref]
672. Catherine Boulatoff, Michael Jenkins. 2010. Long-term Nexus Between Openness, Income, and
Environmental Quality. International Advances in Economic Research 16:4, 410-418. [Crossref]
673. David A. Fleming, David G. Abler, Stephan J. Goetz. 2010. Agricultural trade and poverty in Chile:
a spatial analysis of product tradability. Agricultural Economics 41:6, 545-553. [Crossref]
674. Susan Sunila Sharma. 2010. The relationship between energy and economic growth: Empirical
evidence from 66 countries☆. Applied Energy 87:11, 3565-3574. [Crossref]
675. M. Bleaney, A. Dimico. 2010. Geographical Influences on Long-Run Development. Journal of African
Economies 19:5, 635-656. [Crossref]
676. Cuneyt Koyuncu, Rasim Yilmaz. 2010. Chinese exports and productivity gains: panel evidence. Asian-
Pacific Economic Literature 24:2, 161-170. [Crossref]
677. Yanling Wang. 2010. FDI and productivity growth: the role of inter-industry linkages. Canadian
Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique 43:4, 1243-1272. [Crossref]
678. Tarlok Singh. 2010. Does International Trade Cause Economic Growth? A Survey. The World
Economy 33:11, 1517-1564. [Crossref]
679. Chih Ming Tan. 2010. No one true path: uncovering the interplay between geography, institutions,
and fractionalization in economic development. Journal of Applied Econometrics 25:7, 1100-1127.
[Crossref]
680. Borja Larrain. 2010. Stock Market Development and Cross-Country Differences in Relative Prices.
Review of Economics and Statistics 92:4, 784-797. [Crossref]
681. Albert Park, Dean Yang, Xinzheng Shi, Yuan Jiang. 2010. Exporting and Firm Performance: Chinese
Exporters and the Asian Financial Crisis. Review of Economics and Statistics 92:4, 822-842. [Crossref]
682. Oxana Babecká Kucharčuková, Jan Babecký, Martin Raiser. 2010. Gravity Approach for Modelling
International Trade in South-Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States: The
Role of Geography, Policy and Institutions. Open Economies Review . [Crossref]
683. M. J. Herrerias, Vicente Orts. 2010. Equipment investment, output and productivity in China.
Empirical Economics . [Crossref]
684. Roger Smeets, Yingqi Wei. 2010. Productivity Effects of United States Multinational Enterprises:
The Roles of Market Orientation and Regional Integration. Regional Studies 44:8, 949-963. [Crossref]
685. Thomas Grennes. 2010. A Thousand Years of Trade History: What's Left Out?. Historical Methods:
A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History 43:4, 159-163. [Crossref]
686. Dana Schüler, Julian Weisbrod. 2010. Ethnic fractionalisation, migration and growth. Empirical
Economics 39:2, 457-486. [Crossref]
687. Rabah Arezki, Frederick van der Ploeg. 2010. Trade policies, institutions and the natural resource
curse. Applied Economics Letters 17:15, 1443-1451. [Crossref]
688. Gianluca Orefice. 2010. Skilled migration and economic performances: Evidence from OECD
countries. Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics 146:4, 781-820. [Crossref]
689. N. Crafts, P. Fearon. 2010. Lessons from the 1930s Great Depression. Oxford Review of Economic
Policy 26:3, 285-317. [Crossref]
690. Samuel Brazys. 2010. Race to give? The selective effectiveness of United States trade capacity building
assistance. Review of International Political Economy 17:3, 537-561. [Crossref]
691. Chan-Hyun Sohn, Hongshik Lee. 2010. Trade Structure, FTAs, and Economic Growth. Review of
Development Economics 14:3, 683-698. [Crossref]
692. Pak Hung Mo. 2010. Trade Intensity, Net Export, and Economic Growth. Review of Development
Economics 14:3, 563-576. [Crossref]
693. Tran Van Hoa. 2010. Impact of the WTO Membership, Regional Economic Integration, and
Structural Change on China's Trade and Growth. Review of Development Economics 14:3, 577-591.
[Crossref]
694. David H. Bearce, Daniel C. Tirone. 2010. Foreign Aid Effectiveness and the Strategic Goals of Donor
Governments. The Journal of Politics 72:03, 837-851. [Crossref]
695. María Jesús Herrerias, Vicente Orts. 2010. Is the Export-led Growth Hypothesis Enough to Account
for China's Growth?. China & World Economy 18:4, 34-51. [Crossref]
696. Pablo Astorga. 2010. A century of economic growth in Latin America☆. Journal of Development
Economics 92:2, 232-243. [Crossref]
697. Chi Keung Marco LAU. 2010. New evidence about regional income divergence in China. China
Economic Review 21:2, 293-309. [Crossref]
698. Chun-Ping Chang, Chien-Chiang Lee. 2010. Globalization and Economic Growth: A Political
Economy Analysis for OECD Countries. Global Economic Review 39:2, 151-173. [Crossref]
699. P. Buys, U. Deichmann, D. Wheeler. 2010. Road Network Upgrading and Overland Trade Expansion
in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of African Economies 19:3, 399-432. [Crossref]
700. Rock-Antoine Mehanna, Yousef Yazbeck, Leyla Sarieddine. 2010. Governance and Economic
Development in MENA Countries: Does Oil Affect the Presence of a Virtuous Circle?. Journal of
Transnational Management 15:2, 117-150. [Crossref]
701. Farhad Rassekh, John Speir. 2010. Can economic globalization lead to a more just society?. Journal
of Global Ethics 6:1, 27-43. [Crossref]
702. Stephen Knowles, P. Dorian Owen. 2010. Which Institutions are Good for Your Health? The Deep
Determinants of Comparative Cross-country Health Status. Journal of Development Studies 46:4,
701-723. [Crossref]
703. Ann-Sofie Isaksson. 2010. Social divisions and institutions: assessing institutional parameter variation.
Public Choice . [Crossref]
704. Stephen MacDonald, Suwen Pan, Agapi Somwaru, Francis Tuan. 2010. China's role in world cotton
and textile markets: a joint computable general equilibrium/partial equilibrium approach. Applied
Economics 42:7, 875-885. [Crossref]
705. Daniel Lederman, Marcelo Olarreaga, Lucy Payton. 2010. Export promotion agencies: Do they work?.
Journal of Development Economics 91:2, 257-265. [Crossref]
706. Maria Socorro Gochoco-Bautista, Dennis S. Mapa. 2010. Linkages between Trade and Financial
Integration and Output Growth in East Asia. Asian Economic Journal 24:1, 1-22. [Crossref]
707. Shiu-Sheng Chen, Ming-Ching Luoh. 2010. Are Mathematics and Science Test Scores Good
Indicators of Labor-Force Quality?. Social Indicators Research 96:1, 133-143. [Crossref]
708. R. Ponds, F. v. Oort, K. Frenken. 2010. Innovation, spillovers and university-industry collaboration:
an extended knowledge production function approach. Journal of Economic Geography 10:2, 231-255.
[Crossref]
709. Kris Iyer. 2010. The Determinants of Firm-Level Export Intensity in New Zealand Agriculture
and Forestry11This paper is partly derived from a research report written by the author for
the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF), New Zealand (NZ). Funding from MAF is
acknowledged. Thanks are due to Mr. Darran Austin of MAF and an anonymous referee who made
several comments to improve the paper.,22Disclaimer: The opinions, findings, recommendations and
conclusions expressed in this report are those of the authors. Statistics NZ, the Ministry of Economic
Development, NZ and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, NZ take no responsibility for any
omissions or errors in the information contained here. Access to the data used in this study was
provided by Statistics NZ in accordance with security and confidentiality provisions of the Statistics
Act 1975. Only people authorised by the Statistics Act 1975 are allowed to see data about a particular,
business or organisation. The results in this paper have been confidentialised to protect individual
businesses from identification. Statistics NZ protocols were applied to the data sourced from the
New Zealand Customs Service; the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology; New Zealand
Trade and Enterprise; and Te Puni Kokiri. Any discussion of data limitations is not related to the
data‘s ability to support these government agencies’ core operational requirements. Any table or other
material in this report may be reproduced and published without further licence, provided that it does
not purport to be published under government authority and that acknowledgement is made of this
source. Economic Analysis and Policy 40:1, 75-86. [Crossref]
710. Suryadipta Roy. 2010. Is corruption anti-labour?. Applied Economics Letters 17:4, 329-333. [Crossref]
711. Reuven Glick, Alan M Taylor. 2010. Collateral Damage: Trade Disruption and the Economic Impact
of War. Review of Economics and Statistics 92:1, 102-127. [Crossref]
712. Meghana Ayyagari, Renáta Kosová. 2010. Does FDI Facilitate Domestic Entry? Evidence from the
Czech Republic. Review of International Economics 18:1, 14-29. [Crossref]
713. Martin A. Andresen. 2010. Geographies of International Trade: Theory, Borders, and Regions.
Geography Compass 4:2, 94-105. [Crossref]
714. Christopher Balding. 2010. Joining the World Trade Organization: What is the Impact?. Review of
International Economics 18:1, 193-206. [Crossref]
715. Won,Yongkul. 2010. Export-led, or Import-led Economic Growth?: Evidence from Major ASEAN
Countries. The Southeast Asian Review 20:1, 41-70. [Crossref]
716. Hun-Chang Lee. 2010. How Geography and International Relations Shaped Economic Development
in the Republic of Korea. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2:5, 7208-7217. [Crossref]
717. Claudia M. Buch, Paola Monti. 2010. Openness and income disparities: does trade explain the
“Mezzogiorno effect”?. Review of World Economics 145:4, 667-688. [Crossref]
718. IMF. Research Dept.. World Economic Outlook, April 2010: Rebalancing Growth . [Crossref]
719. Abdoul' Ganiou Mijiyawa. 2010. Fighting inflation in developing countries: Does democracy help?
An empirical investigation. Journal of International Development n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
720. Artur Tamazian, B. Bhaskara Rao. 2010. Do economic, financial and institutional developments
matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies. Energy Economics 32:1,
137-145. [Crossref]
721. Aart Kraay. 2010. Instrumental variables regressions with uncertain exclusion restrictions: a Bayesian
approach. Journal of Applied Econometrics n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
722. Ann Harrison, Andrés Rodríguez-Clare. Trade, Foreign Investment, and Industrial Policy for
Developing Countries* 4039-4214. [Crossref]
723. Theo S. Eicher, Christian Henn, Chris Papageorgiou. 2010. Trade creation and diversion revisited:
accounting for model uncertainty and natural trading partner effects. Journal of Applied Econometrics
n/a-n/a. [Crossref]
724. J.W.B. Bos, C. Economidou, M. Koetter, J.W. Kolari. 2010. Do all countries grow alike?☆. Journal of
Development Economics 91:1, 113-127. [Crossref]
725. Eduardo Levy Yeyati, Federico Sturzenegger. Monetary and Exchange Rate Policies 4215-4281.
[Crossref]
726. Elaine Hutson, Simon Stevenson. 2010. Openness, hedging incentives and foreign exchange exposure:
A firm-level multi-country study. Journal of International Business Studies 41:1, 105-122. [Crossref]
727. Hideki Toya, Mark Skidmore, Raymond Robertson. 2010. A Reevaluation of the Effect of Human
Capital Accumulation on Economic Growth Using Natural Disasters as an Instrument. Eastern
Economic Journal 36:1, 120-137. [Crossref]
728. Dawood Mamoon, S. Mansoob Murshed. 2009. Want economic growth with good quality
institutions? Spend on education. Education Economics 17:4, 445-468. [Crossref]
729. El-hadj M Bah, Josef C Brada. 2009. Total Factor Productivity Growth, Structural Change and
Convergence in the New Members of the European Union. Comparative Economic Studies 51:4,
421-446. [Crossref]
730. S. Bhattacharyya. 2009. Root Causes of African Underdevelopment. Journal of African Economies 18:5,
745-780. [Crossref]
731. Shunsuke Managi, Akira Hibiki, Tetsuya Tsurumi. 2009. Does trade openness improve environmental
quality?. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58:3, 346-363. [Crossref]
732. Adeel Malik, Jonathan R.W. Temple. 2009. The geography of output volatility☆. Journal of
Development Economics 90:2, 163-178. [Crossref]
733. Vijay Vemuri, Shahid Siddiqi. 2009. Impact of Commercialization of the Internet on International
Trade: A Panel Study Using the Extended Gravity Model. The International Trade Journal 23:4,
458-484. [Crossref]
734. MIAO WANG, M. C. SUNNY WONG. 2009. FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT AND
ECONOMIC GROWTH: THE GROWTH ACCOUNTING PERSPECTIVE. Economic Inquiry
47:4, 701-710. [Crossref]
735. Yunfang Hu, Murray C. Kemp, Koji Shimomura. 2009. A two-country dynamic Heckscher–Ohlin
model with physical and human capital accumulation. Economic Theory 41:1, 67-84. [Crossref]
736. Jakob B. Madsen. 2009. Trade Barriers, Openness, and Economic Growth. Southern Economic Journal
76:2, 397-418. [Crossref]
737. Stephen R. Bond, Adeel Malik. 2009. Natural resources, export structure, and investment. Oxford
Economic Papers 61:4, 675-702. [Crossref]
738. Claudia M. Buch, Farid Toubal. 2009. Openness and growth: The long shadow of the Berlin Wall.
Journal of Macroeconomics 31:3, 409-422. [Crossref]
739. N. Crafts. 2009. Transport infrastructure investment: implications for growth and productivity.
Oxford Review of Economic Policy 25:3, 327-343. [Crossref]
740. ANTHONY J. MAKIN, PARESH KUMAR NARAYAN. 2009. Has International Trade in Saving
Improved US Economic Welfare?. Economic Record 85, S2-S9. [Crossref]
741. Dong-Hyeon Kim, Shu-Chin Lin. 2009. Trade and Growth at Different Stages of Economic
Development. Journal of Development Studies 45:8, 1211-1224. [Crossref]
742. Kunal Sen, Dirk Te Velde. 2009. State Business Relations and Economic Growth in Sub-Saharan
Africa. Journal of Development Studies 45:8, 1267-1283. [Crossref]
743. HARALD BADINGER, NIKLAS MAYDELL. 2009. Legal and Economic Issues in Completing
the EU Internal Market for Services: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. JCMS: Journal of Common
Market Studies 47:4, 693-717. [Crossref]
744. Marilyne Huchet-Bourdon, Anna Lipchitz, Audrey Rousson. 2009. Aid for Trade in Developing
Countries: Complex Linkages for Real Effectiveness. African Development Review 21:2, 243-290.
[Crossref]
745. SAMBIT BHATTACHARYYA, STEVE DOWRICK, JANE GOLLEY. 2009. Institutions and
Trade: Competitors or Complements in Economic Development?. Economic Record 85:270, 318-330.
[Crossref]
746. Marcos Chamon, Michael Kremer. 2009. Economic transformation, population growth and the long-
run world income distribution☆. Journal of International Economics 79:1, 20-30. [Crossref]
747. Anthony J. Venables. 2009. Rethinking Economic Growth in a Globalizing World: An Economic
Geography Lens. African Development Review 21:2, 331-351. [Crossref]
748. Thanh Le. 2009. Trade, Remittances, Institutions, and Economic Growth. International Economic
Journal 23:3, 391-408. [Crossref]
749. Paul Mosley, Blessing Chiripanhura. 2009. Liberalisation and poverty in Africa since 1990-Why is
the operation of the ‘invisible hand’ uneven?. Journal of International Development 21:6, 749-756.
[Crossref]
750. Julian di Giovanni, Andrei A Levchenko. 2009. Trade Openness and Volatility. Review of Economics
and Statistics 91:3, 558-585. [Crossref]
751. Alfonso Gambardella, Myriam Mariani, Salvatore Torrisi. 2009. How 'Provincial' Is Your Region?
Openness and Regional Performance in Europe. Regional Studies 43:7, 935-947. [Crossref]
752. Gustav Hansson. 2009. What Determines Rule of Law? An Empirical Investigation of Rival Models.
Kyklos 62:3, 371-393. [Crossref]
753. Daniel L. Millimet, Rusty Tchernis. 2009. On the Specification of Propensity Scores, With
Applications to the Analysis of Trade Policies. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 27:3, 397-415.
[Crossref]
754. Stephan Klasen, Francesca Lamanna. 2009. The Impact of Gender Inequality in Education and
Employment on Economic Growth: New Evidence for a Panel of Countries. Feminist Economics 15:3,
91-132. [Crossref]
755. Frederic S. Mishkin. 2009. Globalization and financial development☆. Journal of Development
Economics 89:2, 164-169. [Crossref]
756. R. Ramcharan. 2009. Why an economic core: domestic transport costs. Journal of Economic Geography
9:4, 559-581. [Crossref]
757. Eiji Yamamura, Inyong Shin. 2009. Effects of Income Inequality on Growth through Efficiency
Improvement and Capital Accumulation. International Economic Journal 23:2, 237-258. [Crossref]
758. William R. Hauk, Romain Wacziarg. 2009. A Monte Carlo study of growth regressions. Journal of
Economic Growth 14:2, 103-147. [Crossref]
759. Pushan Dutt, Devashish Mitra, Priya Ranjan. 2009. International trade and unemployment: Theory
and cross-national evidence. Journal of International Economics 78:1, 32-44. [Crossref]
760. Matthias Busse, Carsten Hefeker. 2009. Trade, labour market regulations and growth. Applied
Economics Letters 16:8, 809-812. [Crossref]
761. Jorge Balat, Irene Brambilla, Guido Porto. 2009. Realizing the gains from trade: Export crops,
marketing costs, and poverty. Journal of International Economics 78:1, 21-31. [Crossref]
762. Francisco Serranito. 2009. Trade, catching-up and divergence. International Review of Applied
Economics 23:3, 239-264. [Crossref]
763. David Hummels, Volodymyr Lugovskyy, Alexandre Skiba. 2009. The trade reducing effects of market
power in international shipping. Journal of Development Economics 89:1, 84-97. [Crossref]
764. Dan Stegarescu. 2009. The effects of economic and political integration on fiscal decentralization:
evidence from OECD countries. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique 42:2,
694-718. [Crossref]
765. B. Bhaskara Rao, Maheshwar Rao. 2009. Openness and growth in Fiji: some time series evidence.
Applied Economics 41:13, 1653-1662. [Crossref]
766. Arjan M. Lejour, Vladimir Solanic, Paul J. G. Tang. 2009. EU Accession and Income Growth: An
Empirical Approach. Transition Studies Review 16:1, 127-144. [Crossref]
767. Ahmet Aysan, Gaobo Pang, Marie-Ange Veganzones-Varoudakis. 2009. Uncertainty, economic
reforms and private investment in the Middle East and North Africa. Applied Economics 41:11,
1379-1395. [Crossref]
768. Kazuhiko Yokota, Akinori Tomohara. 2009. Extending the Learning-By-Exporting Hypothesis:
Introducing a Credit Constraint. International Advances in Economic Research 15:2, 169-177. [Crossref]
769. Joshua Aizenman, Yothin Jinjarak. 2009. Globalisation and Developing Countries – a Shrinking Tax
Base?. The Journal of Development Studies 45:5, 653-671. [Crossref]
770. Jessica Henson Decker, Jamus Jerome Lim. 2009. Democracy and trade: an empirical study. Economics
of Governance 10:2, 165-186. [Crossref]
771. TANYA WANCHEK. 2009. Exports and legal institutions: exploring the connection in transition
economies. Journal of Institutional Economics 5:01, 89. [Crossref]
772. Park, Kwang-Soo, Lee young ki. 2009. An Analysis of the Economic Developments and Growth
Determinants in the Baltic Countries. The Journal of Contemporary European Studies 27:1, 115-141.
[Crossref]
773. Raghav Gaiha, Katsushi Imai, Mani Arul Nandhi. 2009. Millennium Development Goal of Halving
Poverty in Asia. Journal of Asian and African Studies 44:2, 215-237. [Crossref]
774. Miao Wang. 2009. Manufacturing FDI and economic growth: evidence from Asian economies. Applied
Economics 41:8, 991-1002. [Crossref]
775. MARTIN A. ANDRESEN. 2009. Regionalizing global trade patterns, 1981-2001: application of a
new method. Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe canadien 53:1, 24-44. [Crossref]
776. Prema-chandra Athukorala. 2009. The Rise of China and East Asian Export Performance: Is the
Crowding-Out Fear Warranted?. World Economy 32:2, 234-266. [Crossref]
777. THEO S. EICHER, ANDREAS LEUKERT. 2009. Institutions and Economic Performance:
Endogeneity and Parameter Heterogeneity. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 41:1, 197-219.
[Crossref]
778. Atrayee Ghosh Roy. 2009. Evidence on economic growth and government size. Applied Economics 41:5,
607-614. [Crossref]
779. Robert C Feenstra, Alan Heston, Marcel P Timmer, Haiyan Deng. 2009. Estimating Real Production
and Expenditures across Nations: A Proposal for Improving the Penn World Tables. Review of
Economics and Statistics 91:1, 201-212. [Crossref]
780. N CHEN, J IMBS, A SCOTT. 2009. The dynamics of trade and competition☆. Journal of
International Economics 77:1, 50-62. [Crossref]
781. Pushan Dutt. 2009. Trade protection and bureaucratic corruption: an empirical investigation.
Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique 42:1, 155-183. [Crossref]
782. Jay Squalli, Kenneth Wilson. 2009. Openness and access. Applied Economics 41:3, 363-379. [Crossref]
783. Håvard Hegre. 2009. Trade Dependence or Size Dependence?. Conflict Management and Peace Science
26:1, 26-45. [Crossref]
784. Giorgio Fazio. EMU and the Euro-Mediterranean Dialogue: Trade Interdependence between
Mediterranean and Euro-area Countries 89-109. [Crossref]
785. Hiau Looi Kee, Alessandro Nicita, Marcelo Olarreaga. 2009. Estimating Trade Restrictiveness
Indices*. The Economic Journal 119:534, 172-199. [Crossref]
786. R DAVIES, A VOY. 2009. The effect of FDI on child labor☆. Journal of Development Economics 88:1,
59-66. [Crossref]
787. Andy Sumner, Meera Tiwari. Doing Globalisation 165-196. [Crossref]
788. Fan Zhai. Unlocking the Trade Potential in Least-Developed Countries: A CGE Investigation for
Bangladesh 150-174. [Crossref]
789. Patricia Macchi, Sandra Sequeira. 2009. L'infrastructure de transport « immatérielle » des ports de
Maputo et Durban. Afrique contemporaine 230:2, 69. [Crossref]
790. A TAMAZIAN, J CHOUSA, K VADLAMANNATI. 2009. Does higher economic and financial
development lead to environmental degradation: Evidence from BRIC countries. Energy Policy 37:1,
246-253. [Crossref]
791. Shujiro Urata. 2009. Globalization and Income Inequality. KOKUSAI KEIZAI 2009:60, 90-108.
[Crossref]
792. Steven N. Durlauf, Paul A. Johnson, Jonathan R. W. Temple. The Methods of Growth Econometrics
1119-1179. [Crossref]
793. Yusheng Peng. Foreign direct investment and SOE performance in China: Ecvidence from the Third
Industrial Census 105-127. [Crossref]
794. Ruwan Jayathilaka, Nandasiri Keembiyahetti. 2009. Adverse Selection Effect for South Asian
Countries in FTA Formation. South Asia Economic Journal 10:1, 1-30. [Crossref]
795. Raju Jan Singh, Kyung-woo Lee, Markus Haacker. 2009. Determinants and Macroeconomic Impact
of Remittances in Sub-Saharan Africa. IMF Working Papers 09:216, 1. [Crossref]
796. John M. Piotrowski, Rabah Arezki, Reda Cherif. 2009. Tourism Specialization and Economic
Development+L4183: Evidence from the UNESCO World Heritage List. IMF Working Papers
09:176, 1. [Crossref]
797. Remco H. Oostendorp. 2009. Globalization and the Gender Wage Gap. The World Bank Economic
Review 23:1, 141-161. [Crossref]
798. Vatcharin Sirimaneetham, Jonathan R.W. Temple. 2009. Macroeconomic Stability and the
Distribution of Growth Rates. The World Bank Economic Review 23:3, 443-479. [Crossref]
799. Azmat Gani, Biman Chand Prasad. 2008. The relationship between institutional quality and trade in
Pacific Island countries. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy 7:2, 123-138. [Crossref]
800. M. Bosker, H. Garretsen. 2008. Economic development and the geography of institutions. Journal of
Economic Geography 9:3, 295-328. [Crossref]
801. D KELLENBERG. 2008. A reexamination of the role of income for the trade and environment
debate. Ecological Economics 68:1-2, 106-115. [Crossref]
802. Andrea Asoni. 2008. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS AND GROWTH AS
POLITICAL EQUILIBRIA. Journal of Economic Surveys 22:5, 953-987. [Crossref]
803. 2008. Book Reviews. Journal of Economic Literature 46:4, 989-1041. [Abstract] [View PDF article]
[PDF with links]
804. Stephen J. Redding,, Daniel M. Sturm. 2008. The Costs of Remoteness: Evidence from German
Division and Reunification. American Economic Review 98:5, 1766-1797. [Abstract] [View PDF
article] [PDF with links]
805. Mahvash Saeed Qureshi, Guanghua Wan. 2008. Distributional Consequences of Globalisation:
Empirical Evidence from Panel Data. The Journal of Development Studies 44:10, 1424-1449. [Crossref]
806. Justin Yifu Lin. 2008. Economic thoughts from an East Asian perspective: a conceptual framework
of viability and development strategy. China Economic Journal 1:3, 245-274. [Crossref]
807. Kris James Mitchener, Marc Weidenmier. 2008. Trade and Empire*. The Economic Journal 118:533,
1805-1834. [Crossref]
808. George Halkos, Nickolaos Tzeremes. 2008. Trade efficiency and economic development: evidence
from a cross country comparison. Applied Economics 40:21, 2749-2764. [Crossref]
809. Giorgio Fazio, Ronald MacDonald, Jacques Melitz. 2008. Trade Costs, Trade Balances and Current
Accounts: An Application of Gravity to Multilateral Trade. Open Economies Review 19:5, 557-578.
[Crossref]
810. Chen Xuegang. 2008. Study on Xinjiang’s bilateral trade using a gravity model. Asia Europe Journal
6:3-4, 507-517. [Crossref]
811. Raghuram G. Rajan, Arvind Subramanian. 2008. Aid and Growth: What Does the Cross-Country
Evidence Really Show?. Review of Economics and Statistics 90:4, 643-665. [Crossref]
812. Neil Foster. 2008. The Impact of Trade Liberalisation on Economic Growth: Evidence from a Quantile
Regression Analysis. Kyklos 61:4, 543-567. [Crossref]
813. AREENDAM CHANDA, CARL-JOHAN DALGAARD. 2008. Dual Economies and International
Total Factor Productivity Differences: Channelling the Impact from Institutions, Trade, and
Geography. Economica 75:300, 629-661. [Crossref]
814. Jeffrey Frankel, Ben Smit, Federico Sturzenegger. 2008. South Africa: Macroeconomic challenges after
a decade of success 1. Economics of Transition 16:4, 639-677. [Crossref]
815. ODED GALOR, ANDREW MOUNTFORD. 2008. Trading Population for Productivity: Theory
and Evidence. Review of Economic Studies 75:4, 1143-1179. [Crossref]
816. Caroline Freund, Bineswaree Bolaky. 2008. Trade, regulations, and income☆. Journal of Development
Economics 87:2, 309-321. [Crossref]
817. Mahvash Saeed Qureshi, Guanghua Wan. 2008. Trade Expansion of China and India: Threat or
Opportunity?. World Economy 31:10, 1327-1350. [Crossref]
818. Garth Frazer. 2008. Used-Clothing Donations and Apparel Production in Africa*. The Economic
Journal 118:532, 1764-1784. [Crossref]
819. . Exchange Rate Analysis in Support of IMF Surveillance . [Crossref]
820. chun-ping chang, yung-hsiang ying. 2008. THE GENERATIVE POWER OF AIR FREIGHT IN
THE TRADE OPENNESS - ECONOMIC GROWTH NEXUS IN AFRICAN COUNTRIES.
South African Journal of Economics 76:3, 493-512. [Crossref]
821. Joan-Ramon Borrell, Mara Tolosa. 2008. Endogenous antitrust: cross-country evidence on the
impact of competition-enhancing policies on productivity. Applied Economics Letters 15:11, 827-831.
[Crossref]
822. Prabirjit Sarkar. 2008. Trade Openness and Growth: Is There Any Link?. Journal of Economic Issues
42:3, 763-785. [Crossref]
823. José Aixalá, Gema Fabro. 2008. DOES THE IMPACT OF INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY ON
ECONOMIC GROWTH DEPEND ON INITIAL INCOME LEVEL?. Economic Affairs 28:3,
45-49. [Crossref]
824. Sjoerd Beugelsdijk, Roger Smeets, Remco Zwinkels. 2008. The impact of horizontal and vertical FDI
on host's country economic growth. International Business Review 17:4, 452-472. [Crossref]
825. Helian Xu, Mingyong Lai, Peng Qi. 2008. Openness, human capital and total factor productivity:
evidence from China. Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies 6:3, 279-289. [Crossref]
826. JAC C. HECKELMAN, STEPHEN KNACK. 2008. Foreign Aid and Market-Liberalizing Reform.
Economica 75:299, 524-548. [Crossref]
827. Harald Badinger. 2008. Cross-country evidence on the productivity effects of trade: the role of
competition and country size. Applied Economics Letters 15:9, 671-675. [Crossref]
828. Maria Cipollina, Luca Salvatici. 2008. MEASURING PROTECTION: MISSION IMPOSSIBLE?.
Journal of Economic Surveys 22:3, 577-616. [Crossref]
829. Jessica Henson Decker, Jamus Jerome Lim. 2008. What fundamentally drives growth? Revisiting the
institutions and economic performance debate. Journal of International Development 20:5, 698-725.
[Crossref]
830. Paolo Epifani, Gino Gancia. 2008. The Skill Bias of World Trade*. The Economic Journal 118:530,
927-960. [Crossref]
831. Michael Funke, Ralf Ruhwedel. 2008. Trade, product variety and welfare: a quantitative assessment
for mainland China. China Economic Journal 1:2, 203-212. [Crossref]
832. Colin Kirkpatrick, S. Serban Scrieciu. 2008. Is trade liberalisation bad for the environment? A review of
the economic evidence. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 51:4, 497-510. [Crossref]
833. Meghana Ayyagari, Asli Demirgüç-Kunt, Vojislav Maksimovic. 2008. How Well Do Institutional
Theories Explain Firms’ Perceptions of Property Rights?. Review of Financial Studies 21:4, 1833-1871.
[Crossref]
834. Jere R. Francis, Inder K. Khurana, Xiumin Martin, Raynolde Pereira. 2008. The Role of Firm-Specific
Incentives and Country Factors in Explaining Voluntary IAS Adoptions: Evidence from Private Firms.
European Accounting Review 17:2, 331-360. [Crossref]
835. Levon Barseghyan. 2008. Entry costs and cross-country differences in productivity and output. Journal
of Economic Growth 13:2, 145-167. [Crossref]
836. Richard Kneller, C. W. Morgan, Sunti Kanchanahatakij. 2008. Trade Liberalisation and Economic
Growth. The World Economy 31:6, 701-719. [Crossref]
837. Sebastian Edwards. 2008. Globalisation, Growth and Crises: The View from Latin America. Australian
Economic Review 41:2, 123-140. [Crossref]
838. Peter Lorentzen, John McMillan, Romain Wacziarg. 2008. Death and development. Journal of
Economic Growth 13:2, 81-124. [Crossref]
839. Muhammad Nadim Hanif, Sabina Khurram Jafri. 2008. Financial Development and Textile Sector
Competitiveness. South Asia Economic Journal 9:1, 141-158. [Crossref]
840. Daron Acemoglu,, Simon Johnson,, James A. Robinson,, Pierre Yared. 2008. Income and Democracy.
American Economic Review 98:3, 808-842. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
841. Lisa Borgatti. 2008. Pacific islands' bilateral trade: the role of remoteness and of transport costs.
Journal of International Development 20:4, 486-501. [Crossref]
842. Utsav Kumar, Prachi Mishra. 2008. Trade Liberalization and Wage Inequality: Evidence from India.
Review of Development Economics 12:2, 291-311. [Crossref]
843. C BRUNNSCHWEILER, E BULTE. 2008. The resource curse revisited and revised: A tale of
paradoxes and red herrings. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 55:3, 248-264.
[Crossref]
844. Jean‐Eric Aubert, Derek H.C. Chen. 2008. The island factor as a growth booster for nations: a mental
advantage econometrically revealed. Journal of Intellectual Capital 9:2, 178-205. [Crossref]
845. Claire Economidou, Antu Panini Murshid. 2008. Testing the Linkages between Trade and
Productivity Growth. Review of Development Economics, ahead of print080415182810704-???.
[Crossref]
846. Phillip Garner. 2008. Congo and Korea: a study in divergence. Journal of International Development
20:3, 326-346. [Crossref]
847. Matthias Busse, José L. Groizard. 2008. Technology Trade in Economic Development. The World
Economy 31:4, 569-592. [Crossref]
848. Luca De Benedictis, Lucia Tajoli. 2008. Similarity in trade structures, integration and catching-up.
The Economics of Transition 16:2, 165-182. [Crossref]
849. Harald Badinger, Fritz Breuss. 2008. Trade and productivity: an industry perspective. Empirica 35:2,
213-231. [Crossref]
850. Augustin Kwasi Fosu, Andrew Mold. 2008. Gains from Trade: Implications for Labour Market
Adjustment and Poverty Reduction in Africa. African Development Review 20:1, 20-48. [Crossref]
851. Xuegang Chen, Zhaoping Yang, Xuling Liu. 2008. Empirical analysis of Xinjiang’s bilateral trade:
Gravity model approach. Chinese Geographical Science 18:1, 9-16. [Crossref]
852. Gouranga Gopal Das. 2008. Does trade and technology transmission facilitate convergence? The role
of technology adoption in reducing the inequality of nations. Journal of Economic Policy Reform 11:1,
67-92. [Crossref]
853. TRAN HOA. 2008. AUSTRALIA-CHINA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT: CAUSAL
EMPIRICS AND POLITICAL ECONOMY. Economic Papers: A journal of applied economics and
policy 27:1, 19-29. [Crossref]
854. A CHARI, P BLAIRHENRY. 2008. Firm-specific information and the efficiency of investment☆.
Journal of Financial Economics 87:3, 636-655. [Crossref]
855. F. Zilibotti. 2008. Economic Growth through the Development Process. CESifo Economic Studies
54:3, 325-357. [Crossref]
856. José Tavares. 2008. Trade, Factor Proportions, and Political Rights. Review of Economics and Statistics
90:1, 163-168. [Crossref]
857. Joseph J. St. Marie, Samuel S. Stanton, Shahdad Naghshpour. 2008. The Colonial Origins of Human
Security: Economic, Geographic, and Institutional Determinants. Politics & Policy 36:1, 80-106.
[Crossref]
858. Arik Levinson, M. Scott Taylor. 2008. UNMASKING THE POLLUTION HAVEN EFFECT.
International Economic Review 49:1, 223-254. [Crossref]
859. IMF. Research Dept.. World Economic Outlook, April 2008: Housing and the Business Cycle .
[Crossref]
860. J. Ernesto López-Córdova, Christopher M. Meissner. 2008. The Impact of International Trade on
Democracy: A Long-Run Perspective. World Politics 60:4, 539-575. [Crossref]
861. Ibrahim Elbadawi, Håvard Hegre. 2008. GLOBALIZATION, ECONOMIC SHOCKS, AND
INTERNAL ARMED CONFLICT. Defence and Peace Economics 19:1, 37-60. [Crossref]
862. Xavier Sala-i-Martin, Arvind Subramanian. Addressing the Natural Resource Curse: An Illustration
from Nigeria 61-92. [Crossref]
863. Edward D. Mansfield, Helen V. Milner, Jon C. Pevehouse. 2008. Democracy, Veto Players and the
Depth of Regional Integration. World Economy 31:1, 67-96. [Crossref]
864. Sébastien Breau, David Rigby. 2008. Participation in Export Markets and Productivity of Plants in
Los Angeles, 1987-1997. Economic Geography 84:1, 27-50. [Crossref]
865. Mustapha K. Nabli, Carlos Silva-Jáuregui, Ahmet Faruk Aysan. 2008. Political Authoritarianism,
Credibility of Reforms and Private Sector Development in the Middle East and North Africa. Revue
d'économie du développement 22:5, 5. [Crossref]
866. Mustapha K. Nabli, Carlos Silva-Jáuregui, Ahmet Faruk Aysan. 2008. Autoritarisme politique,
crédibilité des réformes et développement du secteur privé au Moyen-Orient et en Afrique du Nord.
Revue d'économie du développement 22:3, 49. [Crossref]
867. Hristos Doucouliagos, Mehmet Ali Ulubaşoğlu. 2008. Democracy and Economic Growth: A Meta-
Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 52:1, 61-83. [Crossref]
868. Gabriel Oddone París. 2008. Instituciones y políticas en el declive económico de Uruguay durante el
siglo xx. Revista de Historia Económica / Journal of Iberian and Latin American Economic History 26:01,
45-81. [Crossref]
869. Kaliappa Kalirajan, Kanhaiya Singh. 2008. A Comparative Analysis of China's and India's Recent
Export Performances. Asian Economic Papers 7:1, 1-28. [Crossref]
870. Nina Pavcnik. Trade and Poverty 1-4. [Crossref]
871. Joshua Aizenman. Emerging Markets 1-4. [Crossref]
872. Robert Salomon, Byungchae Jin. 2008. Does knowledge spill to leaders or laggards? Exploring
industry heterogeneity in learning by exporting. Journal of International Business Studies 39:1, 132-150.
[Crossref]
873. Alvaro Angeriz, John McCombie, Mark Roberts. 2008. New Estimates of Returns to Scale and Spatial
Spillovers for EU Regional Manufacturing, 1986?2002. International Regional Science Review 31:1,
62-87. [Crossref]
874. Patrick A. Imam. 2008. Rapid Current Account Adjustments: Are Microstates Different?. IMF
Working Papers 08:233, 1. [Crossref]
875. Jie Yang. 2008. An Analysis of so-Called Export-Led Growth. IMF Working Papers 08:220, 1.
[Crossref]
876. Irineu E. Carvalho Filho, Marcos Chamon. 2008. The Myth of Post-Reform Income Stagnation:
Evidence From Brazil and Mexico. IMF Working Papers 08:97, 1. [Crossref]
877. Nienke Oomes, Christopher M. Meissner. 2008. Why Do Countries Peg the Way they Peg? the
Determinants of Anchor Currency Choice. IMF Working Papers 08:132, 1. [Crossref]
878. Chris Papageorgiou, Christian Henn, Theo S. Eicher. 2008. Trade Creation and Diversion Revisited:
Accounting for Model Uncertainty and Natural Trading Partner Effects. IMF Working Papers 08:66,
1. [Crossref]
879. Romain Wacziarg, Karen Horn Welch. 2008. Trade Liberalization and Growth: New Evidence. The
World Bank Economic Review 22:2, 187-231. [Crossref]
880. Will Martin, Kym Anderson. 2007. The Doha agenda and agricultural trade reform: the role of
economic analysis. Agricultural Economics 37, 77-87. [Crossref]
881. Q DO, A LEVCHENKO. 2007. Comparative advantage, demand for external finance, and financial
development☆. Journal of Financial Economics 86:3, 796-834. [Crossref]
882. Bruce E. Moon. 2007. Reproducing the North-South Divide: The Role of Trade Deficits and Capital
Flows1. International Studies Review 9:4, 581-600. [Crossref]
883. David L. Richards, Ronald Gelleny. 2007. Women’s Status and Economic Globalization. International
Studies Quarterly 51:4, 855-876. [Crossref]
884. Aart Kraay, Jaume Ventura. 2007. Comparative Advantage and the Cross-Section of Business Cycles.
Journal of the European Economic Association 5:6, 1300-1333. [Crossref]
885. Luk Van Langenhove, Philippe De Lombaerde. 2007. Review essay: Regional Integration, Poverty and
Social Policy. Global Social Policy: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Public Policy and Social Development
7:3, 379-385. [Crossref]
886. Tran Van Hoa. 2007. ASEAN3+India Trade Relations. Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic
Research 1:4, 341-357. [Crossref]
887. S. Girma, A. Shortland. 2007. The political economy of financial development. Oxford Economic
Papers 60:4, 567-596. [Crossref]
888. Peter Blair Henry. 2007. Capital Account Liberalization: Theory, Evidence, and Speculation. Journal
of Economic Literature 45:4, 887-935. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
889. James R. Markusen, Anthony J. Venables. 2007. Interacting factor endowments and trade costs: A
multi-country, multi-good approach to trade theory. Journal of International Economics 73:2, 333-354.
[Crossref]
890. Hiau Looi Kee. 2007. Journal of International Economics 73:2, 434-438. [Crossref]
891. Antonis Adam, Pantelis Kammas. 2007. Tax policies in a globalized world: Is it politics after all?.
Public Choice 133:3-4, 321-341. [Crossref]
892. A. Prskawetz, T. Kögel, W.C. Sanderson, S. Scherbov. 2007. The effects of age structure on economic
growth: An application of probabilistic forecasting to India. International Journal of Forecasting 23:4,
587-602. [Crossref]
893. Joshua J. Lewer, Hendrik Van den Berg. 2007. Religion and International Trade: Does the Sharing
of a Religious Culture Facilitate the Formation of Trade Networks?. American Journal of Economics
and Sociology 66:4, 765-794. [Crossref]
894. R. Quentin Grafton, Tom Kompas, P. Dorian Owen. 2007. Bridging the barriers: knowledge
connections, productivity and capital accumulation. Journal of Productivity Analysis 28:3, 219-231.
[Crossref]
895. Robin Burgess, Philippe Aghion. Liberalization and industrial performance 145-162. [Crossref]
896. James Levinsohn, Juan Carlos Hallak. Fooling ourselves 209-223. [Crossref]
897. Zhicheng Liang. 2007. Trade Liberalization, Economic Restructuring and Urban Poverty: The Case
of China. Asian Economic Journal 21:3, 239-259. [Crossref]
898. Harald Badinger. 2007. Market size, trade, competition and productivity: evidence from OECD
manufacturing industries. Applied Economics 39:17, 2143-2157. [Crossref]
899. Ahmet Faruk AYSAN, Mustapha Kamel NABLI, Marie-Ange VÉGANZONÈS-VAROUDAKIS.
2007. GOVERNANCE INSTITUTIONS AND PRIVATE INVESTMENT: AN APPLICATION
TO THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA. The Developing Economies 45:3, 339-377.
[Crossref]
900. Gretta Saab. 2007. A study of economic growth and development in the economic and social
commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) countries. Competitiveness Review 17:3, 153-161. [Crossref]
901. Ali M. Kutan, Taner M. Yigit. 2007. European integration, productivity growth and real convergence.
European Economic Review 51:6, 1370-1395. [Crossref]
902. MATHIAS HOFFMANN. 2007. Fixed versus Flexible Exchange Rates: Evidence from Developing
Countries. Economica 74:295, 425-449. [Crossref]
903. Matthias Helble. 2007. Is God Good for Trade?. Kyklos 60:3, 385-413. [Crossref]
904. C PAPAGEORGIOU, A SAVVIDES, M ZACHARIADIS. 2007. International medical technology
diffusion☆. Journal of International Economics 72:2, 409-427. [Crossref]
905. Shanker Satyanath, Arvind Subramanian. 2007. The Political Economy of Nominal Macroeconomic
Pathologies. IMF Staff Papers 54:3, 419-453. [Crossref]
906. Suwen Pan, Mark Welch, Samarendu Mohanty, Xiurong He. 2007. Distortions of Sino-US and Sino-
EU Safeguard Agreements: Effects on World Textile Markets. China & World Economy 15:4, 78-88.
[Crossref]
907. Axel Borrmann, Matthias Busse. 2007. The Institutional Challenge of the ACP/EU Economic
Partnership Agreements. Development Policy Review 25:4, 403-416. [Crossref]
908. Raja Kali, Javier Reyes. 2007. The architecture of globalization: a network approach to international
economic integration. Journal of International Business Studies 38:4, 595-620. [Crossref]
909. Park Soonchan. 2007. Trade in Services and Economic Growth. Journal of East Asian Economic
Integration 11:1, 3-24. [Crossref]
910. Indur M. Goklany. 2007. Integrated strategies to reduce vulnerability and advance adaptation,
mitigation, and sustainable development. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 12:5,
755-786. [Crossref]
911. abdullahi d ahmed, sandy suardi. 2007. SOURCES OF ECONOMIC GROWTH AND
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA. The South African Journal of
Economics 75:2, 159-178. [Crossref]
912. Edward N. Gamber, Amy K. S. Scott. 2007. A Threshold Analysis of the Relationship Between
Governance and Growth. International Economic Journal 21:2, 255-278. [Crossref]
913. . References 405-439. [Crossref]
914. Tao Kong. 2007. A Selective Review of Recent Developments in the Economic Growth Literature.
Asian-Pacific Economic Literature 21:1, 1-33. [Crossref]
915. Valeria Costantini, Riccardo Crescenzi, Fabrizio De Filippis, Luca Salvatici. 2007. Bargaining
Coalitions in the WTO Agricultural Negotiations. The World Economy 30:5, 863-891. [Crossref]
916. Burcu Duygan, Jesse B. Bump. 2007. Can Trade Help Poor People? The Role of Trade, Trade Policy
and Market Access in Tanzania. Development Policy Review 25:3, 293-310. [Crossref]
917. Yahua Wang, Angang Hu. 2007. Multiple Forces Driving China's Economic Development: A New
Analytic Framework. China & World Economy 15:3, 103-120. [Crossref]
918. Sharmistha Self, Richard Grabowski. 2007. Economic development and the role of agricultural
technology. Agricultural Economics 36:3, 395-404. [Crossref]
919. Arvind Subramanian, Shang-Jin Wei. 2007. The WTO promotes trade, strongly but unevenly☆.
Journal of International Economics 72:1, 151-175. [Crossref]
920. Angela Cheptea. 2007. Trade liberalization and institutional reforms. The Economics of Transition
15:2, 211-255. [Crossref]
921. Jer-Shiou Chiou, Pei-Shan Wu, Antony Chang, Bor-Yi Huang. 2007. The asymmetric information
and price manipulation in stock market. Applied Economics 39:7, 883-891. [Crossref]
922. Teresa L Cyrus, Lynn Lethbridge, Lars Osberg. 2007. The Double-Edged Sword of Trade. Eastern
Economic Journal 33:2, 277-292. [Crossref]
923. Edward Anderson. 2007. Travel and communication and international differences in GDP per capita.
Journal of International Development 19:3, 315-332. [Crossref]
924. Sotiris K. Papaioannou, Sophia P. Dimelis. 2007. Information Technology as a Factor of Economic
Development: Evidence from Developed and Developing Countries. Economics of Innovation and New
Technology 16:3, 179-194. [Crossref]
925. Yumin Sheng. 2007. Global Market Integration and Central Political Control: Foreign Trade and
Intergovernmental Relations in China. Comparative Political Studies 40:4, 405-434. [Crossref]
926. S BAIER, J BERGSTRAND. 2007. Do free trade agreements actually increase members' international
trade?. Journal of International Economics 71:1, 72-95. [Crossref]
927. César Calderón, Alberto Chong, Ernesto Stein. 2007. Trade intensity and business cycle
synchronization: Are developing countries any different?. Journal of International Economics 71:1,
2-21. [Crossref]
928. João Luis Brasil Gondim, Flávio Ataliba Barreto, José Raimundo Carvalho. 2007. Condicionantes de
clubes de convergência no Brasil. Estudos Econômicos (São Paulo) 37:1, 71-100. [Crossref]
929. Eugenia Baroncelli, Ekaterina Krivonos, Marcelo Olarreaga. 2007. Trademark Protection or
Protectionism?. Review of International Economics 15:1, 126-145. [Crossref]
930. Farhad Rassekh. 2007. Is International Trade More Beneficial to Lower Income Economies? An
Empirical Inquiry. Review of Development Economics 11:1, 159-169. [Crossref]
931. Serge Coulombe. 2007. Globalization and Regional Disparity: A Canadian Case Study. Regional
Studies 41:1, 1-17. [Crossref]
932. Wolfgang Keller, Carol H. Shiue. 2007. Market Integration and Economic Development: A Long-
run Comparison. Review of Development Economics 11:1, 107-123. [Crossref]
933. James Feyrer. 2007. Demographics and Productivity. Review of Economics and Statistics 89:1, 100-109.
[Crossref]
934. Jose G. Montalvo, Marta Reynal-Querol. 2007. Fighting against Malaria: Prevent Wars while Waiting
for the “Miraculous” Vaccine. Review of Economics and Statistics 89:1, 165-177. [Crossref]
935. Arne Bigsten. Chapter 15 Aid and Economic Development in Africa 289-311. [Crossref]
936. Marcelo Paiva de Abreu. Trade and Growth: Past Experience and Perspectives for Latin America
220-241. [Crossref]
937. Timothy Michael Lewis. 2007. Impact of globalization on the construction sector in developing
countries. Construction Management and Economics 25:1, 7-23. [Crossref]
938. Nancy Birdsall. Stormy Days on an Open Field: Asymmetries in the Global Economy 227-251.
[Crossref]
939. Mustapha Kamel Nabli, Marie-Ange Véganzonès-Varoudakis. 2007. Reform complementarities and
economic growth in the Middle East and North Africa. Journal of International Development 19:1,
17-54. [Crossref]
940. Pierluigi Montalbano, Alessandro Federici, Umberto Triulzi, Carlo Pietrobelli. Trade Openness and
Vulnerability in Central and Eastern Europe 204-234. [Crossref]
941. Rhys Jenkins. Globalization, Production and Poverty 163-187. [Crossref]
942. P. Dorian Owen, Clayton R. Weatherston. The Deep Determinants of Long-run Growth and
Economic Development 137-166. [Crossref]
943. Aaron Batten, Alan Martina. Diseases Dominate 186-221. [Crossref]
944. Robert C. Feenstra, Hiau Looi Kee. 2007. Trade Liberalisation and Export Variety: A Comparison
of Mexico and China. The World Economy 30:1, 5-21. [Crossref]
945. Machiko Nissanke, Erik Thorbecke. Channels and Policy Debate in the Globalization-Inequality-
Poverty Nexus 22-55. [Crossref]
946. Azim M. Sadikov. 2007. Border and Behind-The-Border Trade Barriers and Country Exports. IMF
Working Papers 07:292, 1. [Crossref]
947. Andreas Billmeier, Tommaso Nannicini. 2007. Trade Openness and Growth: Pursuing Empirical
Glasnost. IMF Working Papers 07:156, 1. [Crossref]
948. Dalia Hakura. 2007. Output Volatility and Large Output Drops in Emerging Market and Developing
Countries. IMF Working Papers 07:114, 1. [Crossref]
949. Daehaeng Kim, Chul-In Lee. 2007. Government Size and Intersectoral Income Fluctuation: An
International Panel Analysis. IMF Working Papers 07:93, 1. [Crossref]
950. Gouranga Gopal Das. 2007. Does Trade and Technology Transmission Facilitate Inequality
Convergence? An inquiry Into the Role of Technology in Reducing the Poverty of Nations. IMF
Working Papers 07:16, 1. [Crossref]
951. Rabah Arezki, Frederik van der Ploeg. 2007. Can the Natural Resource Curse Be Turned Into
a Blessing? T+L3479he Role of Trade Policies and Institutions. IMF Working Papers 07:55, 1.
[Crossref]
952. Ashok Parikh. 2006. Relationship Between Trade Liberalization, Growth, and Balance of Payments
in Developing Countries: An Econometric Study. The International Trade Journal 20:4, 429-467.
[Crossref]
953. L. Alan Winters. 2006. International Trade and Poverty: Cause or Cure?. The Australian Economic
Review 39:4, 347-358. [Crossref]
954. Michał Jerzmanowski. 2006. Empirics of hills, plateaus, mountains and plains: A Markov-switching
approach to growth☆. Journal of Development Economics 81:2, 357-385. [Crossref]
955. Vlad Pavlov, Craig Sugden. 2006. Aid and Growth in the Pacific Islands. Asian-Pacific Economic
Literature 20:2, 38-55. [Crossref]
956. Pedro Cavalcanti Ferreira, Alberto Trejos. 2006. ON THE OUTPUT EFFECTS OF BARRIERS
TO TRADE. International Economic Review 47:4, 1319-1340. [Crossref]
957. David N DeJong, Marla Ripoll. 2006. Tariffs and Growth: An Empirical Exploration of Contingent
Relationships. Review of Economics and Statistics 88:4, 625-640. [Crossref]
958. David E. A. Giles, Chad N. Stroomer. 2006. Does Trade Openness Affect the Speed of Output
Convergence? Some Empirical Evidence. Empirical Economics 31:4, 883-903. [Crossref]
959. Claire Economidou, Vivian Lei, Janet S. Netz. 2006. International Integration and Growth: A Further
Investigation on Developing Countries. International Advances in Economic Research 12:4, 435-448.
[Crossref]
960. Donny Tang. 2006. The effect of financial development on economic growth: evidence from the
APEC countries, 1981–2000. Applied Economics 38:16, 1889-1904. [Crossref]
961. SIMON GUTTMANN, ANTHONY RICHARDS. 2006. TRADE OPENNESS: AN
AUSTRALIAN PERSPECTIVE. Australian Economic Papers 45:3, 188-203. [Crossref]
962. Flávio Vilela Vieira. 2006. China: crescimento econômico de longo prazo. Revista de Economia Política
26:3, 401-424. [Crossref]
963. Francis Breedon, Thórarinn G. Pétursson. 2006. Out in the cold? Iceland's trade performance outside
the European Union and European Monetary Union. Cambridge Journal of Economics 30:5, 723-736.
[Crossref]
964. Axel Borrmann, Matthias Busse, Silke Neuhaus. 2006. Institutional Quality and the Gains from
Trade. Kyklos 59:3, 345-368. [Crossref]
965. Antoine C. El Khoury, Andreas Savvides. 2006. Openness in services trade and economic growth.
Economics Letters 92:2, 277-283. [Crossref]
966. Thorvaldur Gylfason, Gylfi Zoega. 2006. Natural Resources and Economic Growth: The Role of
Investment. The World Economy 29:8, 1091-1115. [Crossref]
967. BORJA LARRAIN. 2006. Do Banks Affect the Level and Composition of Industrial Volatility?. The
Journal of Finance 61:4, 1897-1925. [Crossref]
968. DANIEL Y. KONO. 2006. Optimal Obfuscation: Democracy and Trade Policy Transparency.
American Political Science Review 100:03, 369-384. [Crossref]
969. Rock-Antoine Mehanna. 2006. Open First; Then Invest. Journal of Transnational Management 11:2,
53-76. [Crossref]
970. ROUMEEN ISLAM. 2006. DOES MORE TRANSPARENCY GO ALONG WITH BETTER
GOVERNANCE?. Economics and Politics 18:2, 121-167. [Crossref]
971. Jonathan Temple. 2006. Aggregate Production Functions and Growth Economics. International
Review of Applied Economics 20:3, 301-317. [Crossref]
972. Pandej Chintrakarn, Daniel L. Millimet. 2006. The environmental consequences of trade: Evidence
from subnational trade flows. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 52:1, 430-453.
[Crossref]
973. George R. G. Clarke, Scott J. Wallsten. 2006. Has the Internet Increased Trade? Developed and
Developing Country Evidence. Economic Inquiry 44:3, 465-484. [Crossref]
974. Scott C. Bradford, Paul L. E. Grieco, Gary Clyde Hufbauer. 2006. The Payoff to America from
Globalisation. The World Economy 29:7, 893-916. [Crossref]
975. Douglas S. Massey, Magaly Sanchez R, Jere R. Behrman. 2006. Of Myths and Markets. The ANNALS
of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 606:1, 8-31. [Crossref]
976. Kim Taegi, Park Kuseung. 2006. The Impact of Trade Diversity and Trading Partners on Domestic
Economic Growth. Journal of East Asian Economic Integration 10:1, 29-56. [Crossref]
977. M KOSE, E PRASAD, M TERRONES. 2006. How do trade and financial integration affect
the relationship between growth and volatility?. Journal of International Economics 69:1, 176-202.
[Crossref]
978. Barry EICHENGREEN, Hui TONG. 2006. How China is Reorganizing the World Economy*. Asian
Economic Policy Review 1:1, 73-97. [Crossref]
979. D LEVINE, D ROTHMAN. 2006. Does trade affect child health?. Journal of Health Economics 25:3,
538-554. [Crossref]
980. Rui Castro. 2006. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UNDER ALTERNATIVE TRADE
REGIMES*. International Economic Review 47:2, 611-649. [Crossref]
981. Andrea F. Presbitero. 2006. Institutions and geography as sources of economic development. Journal
of International Development 18:3, 351-378. [Crossref]
982. DON P. CLARK, DONALD BRUCE. 2006. WHO BEARS THE BURDEN OF U.S.
NONTARIFF MEASURES?. Contemporary Economic Policy 24:2, 274-286. [Crossref]
983. Giorgio Canarella, Stephen K. Pollard. 2006. Distribution dynamics and convergence in Latin
America: A non-parametric analysis. International Review of Economics 53:1, 68-95. [Crossref]
 984. J IMBS. 2006. The real effects of financial integration. Journal of International Economics 68:2,
296-324. [Crossref]
985. Rutger Hoekstra, Marco A. Janssen. 2006. Environmental responsibility and policy in a two-country
dynamic input–output model. Economic Systems Research 18:1, 61-84. [Crossref]
986. Jörg Faust. 2006. Die Dividende der Demokratie: Politische Herrschaft und gesamtwirtschaftliche
Produktivität. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 47:1, 62-83. [Crossref]
987. S KALEMLIOZCAN. 2006. Elhanan Helpman, The Mystery of Economic Growth, Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, MA (2004). Journal of International Economics 68:2, 518-527. [Crossref]
988. Jan Ondrich, J. David Richardson, Shuo Zhang. 2006. A further investigation of the link between
trade and income. International Economic Journal 20:1, 19-36. [Crossref]
989. Katarina Keller. 2006. Education Expansion, Expenditures per Student and the Effects on Growth in
Asia. Global Economic Review 35:1, 21-42. [Crossref]
990. Leopoldo Fergusson. 2006. Institutions for Financial Development: What are they and where do they
come from?. Journal of Economic Surveys 20:1, 27-70. [Crossref]
991. Miguel-Ángel Galindo Martín, Agustín Álvarez Herranz. 2006. Regional Exports and Economic
Growth: The Case of Spanish Regions. International Advances in Economic Research 12:1, 81-89.
[Crossref]
992. Don P. Clark, Donald Bruce. 2006. On the Incidence of US Tariffs. The World Economy 29:2, 123-135.
[Crossref]
993. E EDMONDS, N PAVCNIK. 2006. International trade and child labor: Cross-country evidence.
Journal of International Economics 68:1, 115-140. [Crossref]
994. Patrick Artus. 2006. Intégration commerciale avec des pays émergents ayant des ressources importantes
en main-d'œuvre qualifiée. Revue économique 57:4, 673. [Crossref]
995. Jean-Jacques Hallaert. 2006. A History of Empirical Literature on the Relationship Between Trade
and Growth. Mondes en développement 135:3, 63. [Crossref]
996. Gene M. Grossman, Alan O. Sykes. 2006. European Communities – Conditions for the Granting of
Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries (WT/DS246/AB/R). World Trade Review 5:S1, 220-253.
[Crossref]
997. KATARINA R. I. KELLER. 2006. INVESTMENT IN PRIMARY, SECONDARY, AND
HIGHER EDUCATION AND THE EFFECTS ON ECONOMIC GROWTH. Contemporary
Economic Policy 24:1, 18-34. [Crossref]
998. Alex Mourmouras, Peter Rangazas. 2006. Foreign Aid Policy and Sources of Poverty: A Quantitative
Framework. IMF Working Papers 06:14, 1. [Crossref]
999. M. Ayhan Kose, Eswar Prasad, Kenneth Rogoff, Shang-Jin Wei. 2006. Financial Globalization: A
Reappraisal. IMF Working Papers 06:189, 1. [Crossref]
1000. Jean-Claude Nachega, Thomson Fontaine. 2006. Economic Growth and total Factor Productivity in
Niger. IMF Working Papers 06:208, 1. [Crossref]
1001. Thierry Tressel, Alessandro Prati. 2006. Aid Volatility and Dutch Disease: Is there a Role for
Macroeconomic Policies?. IMF Working Papers 06:145, 1. [Crossref]
1002. Kai Carstensen, Erich Gundlach. 2006. The Primacy of Institutions Reconsidered: Direct Income
Effects of Malaria Prevalence. The World Bank Economic Review 20:3, 309-339. [Crossref]
1003. KYM ANDERSON. 2005. On the Virtues of Multilateral Trade Negotiations*. Economic Record
81:255, 414-438. [Crossref]
1004. Enrico Spolaore, Romain Wacziarg. 2005. Borders and Growth. Journal of Economic Growth 10:4,
331-386. [Crossref]
1005. Helen V. Milner. 2005. Globalization, Development, and International Institutions: Normative and
Positive Perspectives. Perspectives on Politics 3:04. . [Crossref]
1006. Ola Olsson. 2005. Geography and institutions: Plausible and implausible linkages. Journal of Economics
86:S1, 167-194. [Crossref]
1007. L LAURETI, P POSTIGLIONE. 2005. The effects of capital inflows on the economic growth in
the Med Area. Journal of Policy Modeling 27:7, 839-851. [Crossref]
1008. Georgios I. Zekos. 2005. Law and finance in a digital and global world. Managerial Law 47:5, 72-152.
[Crossref]
1009. . Central America . [Crossref]
1010. Ricardo A. Lopez. 2005. Trade and Growth: Reconciling the Macroeconomic and Microeconomic
Evidence. Journal of Economic Surveys 19:4, 623-648. [Crossref]
1011. Fahim A. Al-Marhubi. 2005. Openness and Governance: Evidence Across Countries. Oxford
Development Studies 33:3-4, 453-471. [Crossref]
1012. MATHIAS RISSE. 2005. How Does the Global Order Harm the Poor?. Philosophy <html_ent
glyph="@amp;" ascii="&"/> Public Affairs 33:4, 349-376. [Crossref]
1013. Andrew Sumner, Meera Tiwari. 2005. Poverty and economic policy: what happens when researchers
disagree?. Journal of International Development 17:6, 791-801. [Crossref]
1014. C MEISSNER. 2005. A new world order: explaining the international diffusion of the gold standard,
1870–1913. Journal of International Economics 66:2, 385-406. [Crossref]
1015. Roberto Rigobon, Dani Rodrik. 2005. Rule of law, democracy, openness, and income. Estimating the
interrelationships1. The Economics of Transition 13:3, 533-564. [Crossref]
1016. Indra de Soysa, Eric Neumayer. 2005. False Prophet, or Genuine Savior? Assessing the Effects
of Economic Openness on Sustainable Development, 1980–99. International Organization 59:03. .
[Crossref]
1017. Erik Gartzke, Quan Li. 2005. Mistaken Identity: A Reply to Hegre. Conflict Management and Peace
Science 22:3, 225-233. [Crossref]
1018. Nancy Brune, Geoffrey Garrett. 2005. THE GLOBALIZATION RORSCHACH TEST:
International Economic Integration, Inequality, and the Role of Government. Annual Review of
Political Science 8:1, 399-423. [Crossref]
1019. Joan Costa-Font, Eduardo Rodriguez-Oreggia. 2005. Trade and the Effect of Public Investment
on Regional Inequalities in Heterogeneously Integrated Areas. The World Economy 28:6, 873-891.
[Crossref]
1020. Leonardo Becchetti, Giovanni Trovato. 2005. The Determinants of Child Labour: The Role of
Primary Product Specialization. Labour 19:2, 237-271. [Crossref]
1021. Robin Grier. 2005. The Interaction of Human and Physical Capital Accumulation: Evidence from
Sub-Saharan Africa*. Kyklos 58:2, 195-211. [Crossref]
1022. Guido Tabellini. 2005. The Role of the State in Economic Development. Kyklos 58:2, 283-303.
[Crossref]
1023. Alice Sindzingre. 2005. Reforms, Structure or Institutions? Assessing the determinants of growth in
low-income countries. Third World Quarterly 26:2, 281-305. [Crossref]
1024. Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, Laura Márquez-Ramos. 2005. Does Technology Foster Trade?
Empirical Evidence for Developed and Developing Countries. Atlantic Economic Journal 33:1, 55-69.
[Crossref]
1025. M NOGUER, M SISCART. 2005. Trade raises income: a precise and robust result. Journal of
International Economics 65:2, 447-460. [Crossref]
1026. Philippe Aghion. 2005. Growth and Institutions. Empirica 32:1, 3-18. [Crossref]
1027. Daniel M. Bernhofen, John C. Brown. 2005. An Empirical Assessment of the Comparative Advantage
Gains from Trade: Evidence from Japan. American Economic Review 95:1, 208-225. [Abstract] [View
PDF article] [PDF with links]
1028. T KOGEL. 2005. Youth dependency and total factor productivity. Journal of Development Economics
76:1, 147-173. [Crossref]
1029. Eric W. Bond, Ronald W. Jones, Ping Wang. 2005. Economic Takeoffs in a Dynamic Process of
Globalization*. Review of International Economics 13:1, 1-19. [Crossref]
1030. Jeffrey A. Frankel, Andrew K. Rose. 2005. Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out
the Causality. Review of Economics and Statistics 87:1, 85-91. [Crossref]
1031. You Jong-sung, Sanjeev Khagram. 2005. A Comparative Study of Inequality and Corruption. American
Sociological Review 70:1, 136-157. [Crossref]
1032. Charles I. Jones. Growth and Ideas 1063-1111. [Crossref]
1033. Jaume Ventura. A Global View of Economic Growth 1419-1497. [Crossref]
1034. Alberto Alesina, Enrico Spolaore, Romain Wacziarg. Trade, Growth and the Size of Countries
1499-1542. [Crossref]
1035. Markus Rodlauer, Alfred Schipke. Central America: Global Integration and Regional Cooperation .
[Crossref]
1036. Kostas Axarloglou, Mike Pournarakis. 2005. Capital Inflows in the Balkans: Fortune or Misfortune?.
The Journal of Economic Asymmetries 2:2, 21. [Crossref]
1037. Yang Haisheng, Jia Jia, Zhou Yongzhang, Wang Shugong. 2005. The Impact on Environmental
Kuznets Curve by Trade and Foreign Direct Investment in China. Chinese Journal of Population
Resources and Environment 3:2, 14-19. [Crossref]
1038. Bilin Neyapti, Nergiz Dincer. 2005. Measuring the Quality of Bank Regulation and Supervision with
an Application to Transition Economies. Economic Inquiry 43:1, 79-99. [Crossref]
1039. Steven N. Durlauf, Paul A. Johnson, Jonathan R.W. Temple. Chapter 8 Growth Econometrics
555-677. [Crossref]
1040. IMF. Research Dept.. World Economic Outlook, April 2005: Globalization and External Imbalances .
[Crossref]
1041. William Easterly. Chapter 15 National Policies and Economic Growth: A Reappraisal 1015-1059.
[Crossref]
1042. Helen V. Milner, Keiko Kubota. 2005. Why the Move to Free Trade? Democracy and Trade Policy
in the Developing Countries. International Organization 59:01. . [Crossref]
1043. Philippe Aghion, Peter Howitt. Chapter 2 Growth with Quality-Improving Innovations: An
Integrated Framework 67-110. [Crossref]
1044. Michael Funke, Ralf Ruhwedel. 2005. Export variety and economic growth in East European
transition economies*. The Economics of Transition 13:1, 25-50. [Crossref]
1045. Sukumar Nandi, Sunil Kumar. 2005. Variability of Exports and Imports in Indian Perspective: An
Empirical Study. Asia Pacific Business Review 1:1, 68-75. [Crossref]
1046. Arvind Subramanian, Raghuram Rajan. 2005. What Undermines Aid's Impacton Growth?. IMF
Working Papers 05:126, 1. [Crossref]
1047. Prachi Mishra, Utsav Kumar. 2005. Trade Liberalization and Wage Inequality: Evidence From India.
IMF Working Papers 05:20, 1. [Crossref]
1048. International Monetary Fund. 2005. Remoteness and Real Exchange Rate Volatility. IMF Working
Papers 05:1, 1. [Crossref]
1049. Eswar Prasad, Marco Terrones, M. Ayhan Kose. 2005. How Do Trade and Financial Integration Affect
the Relationship Between Growth and Volatility?. IMF Working Papers 05:19, 1. [Crossref]
1050. Charalambos G. Tsangarides. 2005. Growth Empirics Under Model Uncertainty: Is Africa Different?.
IMF Working Papers 05:18, 1. [Crossref]
1051. Raghuram Rajan, Arvind Subramanian. 2005. Aid and Growth: What Does the Cross-Country
Evidence Really Show?. IMF Working Papers 05:127, 1. [Crossref]
1052. Leo Michelis, George K. Zestos. 2004. Exports, Imports and GDP Growth: Causal Relations in Six
European Union Countries. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries 1:2, 71-85. [Crossref]
1053. Georgios Karras. 2004. Aid versus Trade: Comparing their Growth Effects for a Panel of Developing
Countries. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries 1:2, 121-141. [Crossref]
1054. W WONG. 2004. How good are trade and telephone call traffic in bridging income gaps and TFP
gaps?. Journal of International Economics 64:2, 441-463. [Crossref]
1055. H LEE, L RICCI, R RIGOBON. 2004. Once again, is openness good for growth?. Journal of
Development Economics 75:2, 451-472. [Crossref]
1056. Jang C. Jin. 2004. On the Relationship Between Openness and Growth in China: Evidence from
Provincial Time Series Data. The World Economy 27:10, 1571-1582. [Crossref]
1057. S BAIER. 2004. Economic determinants of free trade agreements. Journal of International Economics
64:1, 29-63. [Crossref]
1058. S DODZIN. 2004. Trade and industrialization in developing economies. Journal of Development
Economics 75:1, 319-328. [Crossref]
1059. Mustapha Kamel Nabli, Marie-Ange V&☆x000E9;ganzon&☆x000E8;s-Varoudak. 2004. How does
exchange rate policy affect manufactured exports in MENA countries&☆x0003F;. Applied Economics
36:19, 2209-2219. [Crossref]
1060. . New Partnership for Africa's Development . [Crossref]
1061. W. H. Furtan, Blain M. van Melle. 2004. Canada's Agricultural Trade in North America: Do National
Borders Matter?. Review of Agricultural Economics 26:3, 317-331. [Crossref]
1062. Ting Gao. 2004. FDI, openness and income. Journal of International Trade & Economic Development
13:3, 305-323. [Crossref]
1063. Pierre-Guillaume Meon, Khalid Sekkat. 2004. Does the Quality of Institutions Limit the MENA's
Integration in the World Economy?. The World Economy 27:9, 1475-1498. [Crossref]
1064. Hansson Pär, Lundin Nan Nan. 2004. Exports as an indicator on or promoter of successful swedish
manufacturing firms in the 1990s. Review of World Economics 140:3, 415-445. [Crossref]
1065. . The Macroeconomy of Central America . [Crossref]
1066. Shiva S. Makki, Agapi Somwaru. 2004. Impact of Foreign Direct Investment and Trade on Economic
Growth: Evidence from Developing Countries. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86:3,
795-801. [Crossref]
1067. Jean Imbs. 2004. Trade, Finance, Specialization, and Synchronization. Review of Economics and
Statistics 86:3, 723-734. [Crossref]
1068. Fahim Al-Marhubi. 2004. The Determinants of Governance: A Cross-Country Analysis.
Contemporary Economic Policy 22:3, 394-406. [Crossref]
1069. Fiona McGillivray, Alastair Smith. 2004. The Impact of Leadership Turnover on Trading Relations
Between States. International Organization 58:03. . [Crossref]
1070. S GHOSH. 2004. Are regional trading arrangements trade creating?An application of extreme bounds
analysis. Journal of International Economics 63:2, 369-395. [Crossref]
1071. Harry Bloch, Sam Hak Kan Tang. 2004. Deep determinants of economic growth: institutions,
geography and openness to trade. Progress in Development Studies 4:3, 245-255. [Crossref]
1072. Lee Jaehwa. 2004. Trade, Foreign Direct Investment and R&D Spillovers. Journal of East Asian
Economic Integration 8:1, 117-141. [Crossref]
1073. Shandre Mugan Thangavelu, Gulasekaran Rajaguru. 2004. Is there an export or import-led
productivity growth in rapidly developing Asian countries? a multivariate VAR analysis. Applied
Economics 36:10, 1083-1093. [Crossref]
1074. Håvard Hegre. 2004. Size Asymmetry, Trade, and Militarized Conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution
48:3, 403-429. [Crossref]
1075. Philippe Aghion, Richard Blundell, Rachel Griffith, Peter Howitt, Susanne Prantl. 2004. Entry
and Productivity Growth: Evidence from Microlevel Panel Data. Journal of the European Economic
Association 2:2-3, 265-276. [Crossref]
1076. Quan Li, Drew Schaub. 2004. Economic Globalization and Transnational Terrorism. Journal of
Conflict Resolution 48:2, 230-258. [Crossref]
1077. Mina Kim, Gue Dae Cho, Won W. Koo. 2004. Does the Exchange Rate Matter to Agricultural
Bilateral Trade between Canada and the U.S.?. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue
canadienne d'agroeconomie 52:1, 127-145. [Crossref]
1078. A. K. Ghose. 2004. Global inequality and international trade. Cambridge Journal of Economics 28:2,
229-252. [Crossref]
1079. Jakub Borowski. 2004. Costs and Benefits of Poland's EMU Accession: a Tentative Assessment.
Comparative Economic Studies 46:1, 127-145. [Crossref]
1080. L. Alan Winters, Neil McCulloch, Andrew McKay. 2004. Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The
Evidence So Far. Journal of Economic Literature 42:1, 72-115. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF
with links]
1081. L Alan Winters. 2004. Trade Liberalisation and Economic Performance: An Overview*. The Economic
Journal 114:493, F4-F21. [Crossref]
1082. David Dollar, Aart Kraay. 2004. Trade, Growth, and Poverty*. The Economic Journal 114:493, F22-
F49. [Crossref]
1083. Henri L. F. de Groot, Gert-Jan Linders, Piet Rietveld, Uma Subramanian. 2004. The Institutional
Determinants of Bilateral Trade Patterns. Kyklos 57:1, 103-123. [Crossref]
1084. Guillermo Perry, Daniel Lederman, Rodrigo Suescún. Trade Structure and Policy 142-168. [Crossref]
1085. Richard B. Freeman. 2004. Trade Wars: The Exaggerated Impact of Trade in Economic Debate. The
World Economy 27:1, 1-23. [Crossref]
1086. S Redding. 2004. Economic geography and international inequality. Journal of International Economics
62:1, 53-82. [Crossref]
1087. IMF. Research Dept.. World Economic Outlook, April 2005: Globalization and External Balances .
[Crossref]
1088. Alan V. Deardorff, Robert M. Stern. EU Expansion and EU Growth 74-102. [Crossref]
1089. Dilip Das. 2004. Globalization and the anti-globalization lobby: A deficit of thoughtfulness and
clairvoyance. Global Economic Review 33:4, 35-50. [Crossref]
1090. Sambit Bhattacharyya. 2004. Deep determinants of economic growth. Applied Economics Letters 11:9,
587-590. [Crossref]
1091. Nicholas Crafts. 2004. Globalisation and Economic Growth: A Historical Perspective. The World
Economy 27:1, 45-58. [Crossref]
1092. Matthew Clarke, Sardar M.N. Islam. REFERENCES 240-281. [Crossref]
1093. George M. von Furstenberg, Jianjun Wei. 2004. Overcoming Chinese Monetary Division and External
Anchoring in East Asia. Asian Economic Papers 3:1, 27-54. [Crossref]
1094. International Monetary Fund. 2004. United Kingdom: Selected Issues. IMF Staff Country Reports
04:55, 1. [Crossref]
1095. International Monetary Fund. 2004. Australia: Selected Issues. IMF Staff Country Reports 04:354,
1. [Crossref]
1096. Arvind Subramanian, Shanker Satyanath. 2004. What Determines Long-Run Macroeconomic
Stability? Democratic Institutions. IMF Working Papers 04:215, 1. [Crossref]
1097. International Monetary Fund. 2004. Once Again, is Openness Good for Growth?. IMF Working
Papers 04:135, 1. [Crossref]
1098. Vivek B. Arora, Athanasios Vamvakidis. 2004. How Much Do Trading Partners Matter for Economic
Growth?. IMF Working Papers 04:26, 1. [Crossref]
1099. M. Ayhan Kose, Christopher M. Towe, Guy Meredith. 2004. How Has Nafta Affected the Mexican
Economy? Review and Evidence. IMF Working Papers 04:59, 1. [Crossref]
1100. Dalia Hakura. 2004. Growth in the Middle East and North Africa. IMF Working Papers 04:56, 1.
[Crossref]
1101. Carlo Cottarelli, Julio Escolano. 2004. Assessing the Assessment: A Critical Look At the June 2003
Assessment of the United Kingdom'S Five Tests for Euro Entry. IMF Working Papers 04:116, 1.
[Crossref]
1102. R Stulz. 2003. Culture, openness, and finance. Journal of Financial Economics 70:3, 313-349. [Crossref]
1103. John C. Anyanwu. 2003. Estimating the Macroeconomic Effects of Monetary Unions: The Case of
Trade and Output. African Development Review 15:2-3, 126-145. [Crossref]
1104. Halit Yanikkaya. 2003. Trade openness and economic growth: a cross-country empirical investigation.
Journal of Development Economics 72:1, 57-89. [Crossref]
1105. David H. Bearce. 2003. Grasping the Commercial Institutional Peace. International Studies Quarterly
47:3, 347-370. [Crossref]
1106. John R. Oneal, Bruce Russett, Michael L. Berbaum. 2003. Causes of Peace: Democracy,
Interdependence, and International Organizations, 1885-1992. International Studies Quarterly 47:3,
371-393. [Crossref]
1107. Kwanho Shin, Yunjong Wang. 2003. Trade Integration and Business Cycle Synchronization in East
Asia. Asian Economic Papers 2:3, 1-20. [Crossref]
1108. Giovanni Ferri, Li-Gang Liu. 2003. How Do Global Credit-Rating Agencies Rate Firms from
Developing Countries?. Asian Economic Papers 2:3, 30-56. [Crossref]
1109. Eduardo Levy-Yeyati, Federico Sturzenegger. 2003. To Float or to Fix: Evidence on the Impact of
Exchange Rate Regimes on Growth. American Economic Review 93:4, 1173-1193. [Abstract] [View
PDF article] [PDF with links]
1110. W.S. Bainbridge. 2003. The future in the social sciences. Futures 35:6, 633-650. [Crossref]
1111. Joshua J. Lewer, Hendrik Van den Berg. 2003. How Large Is International Trade's Effect on Economic
Growth?. Journal of Economic Surveys 17:3, 363-396. [Crossref]
1112. R Rajan. 2003. The great reversals: the politics of financial development in the twentieth century.
Journal of Financial Economics 69:1, 5-50. [Crossref]
1113. Emiko Fukase, L. Alan Winters. 2003. Possible Dynamic Effects of AFTA for the New Member
Countries. The World Economy 26:6, 853-871. [Crossref]
1114. Per Botolf Maurseth. 2003. Economic Convergence through Savings, Trade and Technology Flows:
Lessons from Recent Research. Forum for Development Studies 30:1, 29-58. [Crossref]
1115. Glauco Arbix, Mariano Laplane. 2003. Stagnation, Liberalization and Foreign Investment in Latin
America. Competition & Change 7:2-3, 113-125. [Crossref]
1116. Jude C. Hays, John R. Freeman, Hans Nesseth. 2003. Exchange Rate Volatility and Democratization
in Emerging Market Countries. International Studies Quarterly 47:2, 203-228. [Crossref]
1117. Sebnem Kalemli-Ozcan, Bent E. Sørensen, Oved Yosha. 2003. Risk Sharing and Industrial
Specialization: Regional and International Evidence. American Economic Review 93:3, 903-918.
[Citation] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
1118. 2003. Reviews - Besprechungen - Comptes Rendus. Kyklos 56:2, 263-304. [Crossref]
1119. Stanley Fischer. 2003. Globalization and Its Challenges. American Economic Review 93:2, 1-30.
[Citation] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
1120. Mathias Hoffmann. 2003. Cross-country evidence on the link between the level of infrastructure and
capital inflows. Applied Economics 35:5, 515-526. [Crossref]
1121. S Borghesi. 2003. Sustainable globalisation. Ecological Economics 44:1, 77-89. [Crossref]
1122. Jang C. Jin. 2003. Openness and Growth in North Korea: Evidence from Time-Series Data. Review
of International Economics 11:1, 18-27. [Crossref]
1123. W Easterly. 2003. Tropics, germs, and crops: how endowments influence economic development.
Journal of Monetary Economics 50:1, 3-39. [Crossref]
1124. IMF. Research Dept.. World Economic Outlook, September 2003: Public Debt in Emerging Markets .
[Crossref]
1125. IMF. Research Dept.. World Economic Outlook, April 2003: Growth and Institutions . [Crossref]
1126. Andrew Berg, Anne O. Krueger. 2003. Trade, Growth, and Poverty: A Selective Survey. IMF Working
Papers 03:30, 1. [Crossref]
1127. Jean Imbs. 2003. Trade, Finance, Specialization, and Synchronization. IMF Working Papers 03:81,
1. [Crossref]
1128. Shang-Jin Wei, Arvind Subramanian. 2003. The WTO Promotes Trade, Strongly But Unevenly.
IMF Working Papers 03:185, 1. [Crossref]
1129. Allan D. Brunner. 2003. The Long-Run Effects of Tradeon Income and Income Growth. IMF
Working Papers 03:37, 1. [Crossref]
1130. Katrin Elborgh-Woytek. 2003. Of Openess and Distance: Trade Developments in the Commonwealth
of Independent States, 1993-2002. IMF Working Papers 03:207, 1. [Crossref]
1131. Tamim Bayoumi, Manmohan S. Kumar, Giorgio Fazio, Ronald MacDonald. 2003. Fatal Attraction:
A New Measure of Contagion. IMF Working Papers 03:80, 1. [Crossref]
1132. IMF. External Relations Dept.. 2003. Finance & Development, June 2003. Finance & Development
40:2. . [Crossref]
1133. David Dollar, Aart Kraay. 2003. Institutions, trade, and growth. Journal of Monetary Economics 50:1,
133-162. [Crossref]
1134. Marc Piazolo. 2002. REGIONAL INTEGRATION IN SOUTHERN AFRICA. South African
Journal of Economics 70:8, 1198-1221. [Crossref]
1135. D Irwin. 2002. Does trade raise income? Evidence from the twentieth century. Journal of International
Economics 58:1, 1-18. [Crossref]
1136. Robert Holzmann. 2002. Can Investments in Emerging Markets Help to Solve the Ageing Problem?.
Journal of Emerging Market Finance 1:2, 215-241. [Crossref]
1137. Romain Wacziarg. 2002. Review of Easterly’s The Elusive Quest for Growth. Journal of Economic
Literature 40:3, 907-918. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
1138. T Beck. 2002. Financial development and international trade Is there a link?. Journal of International
Economics 57:1, 107-131. [Crossref]
1139. A. S. Bhalla. 2002. Sino-Indian Growth and Liberalization: A Survey. Asian Survey 42:3, 419-439.
[Crossref]
1140. Shahid Yusuf, Weiping Wu. 2002. Pathways to a World City: Shanghai Rising in an Era of
Globalisation. Urban Studies 39:7, 1213-1240. [Crossref]
1141. . Bibliography . [Crossref]
1142. Teresa Cyrus. 2002. INCOME IN THE GRAVITY MODEL OF BILATERAL TRADE: Does
Endogeneity Matter?. The International Trade Journal 16:2, 161-180. [Crossref]
1143. Jagdish Bhagwati, T. N. Srinivasan. 2002. Trade and Poverty in the Poor Countries. American
Economic Review 92:2, 180-183. [Citation] [View PDF article] [PDF with links]
1144. Timothy Frye. 2002. The Perils of Polarization: Economic Performance in the Postcommunist World.
World Politics 54:03, 308-337. [Crossref]
1145. Willem Molle. 2002. Globalization, Regionalism and Labour Markets: Should We Recast the
Foundations of the EU Regime in Matters of Regional (Rural and Urban) Development?. Regional
Studies 36:2, 161-172. [Crossref]
1146. T Rutherford. 2002. Trade liberalization, product variety and growth in a small open economy: a
quantitative assessment. Journal of International Economics 56:2, 247-272. [Crossref]
1147. A Goh. 2002. Learning by doing, trade in capital goods and growth. Journal of International Economics
56:2, 411-444. [Crossref]
1148. Georgios Karras. 2002. Openness and Growth: Cross‐Sectional and Time‐Series Evidence. Review of
Accounting and Finance 1:3, 3-14. [Crossref]
1149. Margaret Lee. 2002. The European Union - South Africa Free Trade Agreement: In Whose Interest?.
Journal of Contemporary African Studies 20:1, 81-106. [Crossref]
1150. IMF. Research Dept.. World Economic Outlook, April 2003: Growth and Institutions . [Crossref]
1151. W. S. Chao, J. Buongiorno. 2002. Exports and growth: a causality analysis for the pulp and paper
industries based on international panel data. Applied Economics 34:1, 1-13. [Crossref]
1152. IMF. Research Dept.. World Economic Outlook, September 2002: Trade and Finance . [Crossref]
1153. Ali F. Darrat, Maxwell K. Hsu, Maosen Zhong. 2002. Foreign Trade, Human Capital and Economic
Growth in Taiwan: A Re‐examination. Studies in Economics and Finance 20:1, 85-94. [Crossref]
1154. Paolo Mauro, Grace Juhn. 2002. Long-Run Determinants of Exchange Rate Regimes: A Simple
Sensitivity Analysis. IMF Working Papers 02:104, 1. [Crossref]
1155. Arvind Subramanian, Francesco Trebbi, Dani Rodrik. 2002. Institutions Rule: The Primacy of
Institutions Over Integration and Geography in Economic Development. IMF Working Papers 02:189,
1. [Crossref]
1156. Sebastian Edwards. 2002. Capital Mobility, Capital Controls, and Globalization in the Twenty-
First Century. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 579:1, 261-270.
[Crossref]
1157. Alberto Chong, Luisa Zanforlin. 2001. Technological adaptation, trade, and growth. Review of World
Economics 137:4, 565-592. [Crossref]
1158. James Lutz. 2001. GROWTH OF INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES AND TRADE
OPENNESS. The International Trade Journal 15:4, 429-455. [Crossref]
1159. HM Sandberg, TL Martin. 2001. TRADE RELATIONSHIPS AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT. South African Journal of Economics 69:3, 405-435. [Crossref]
1160. S Block. 2001. Does Africa grow differently?. Journal of Development Economics 65:2, 443-467.
[Crossref]
1161. Maria Dacosta, Wayne Carroll. 2001. Township and Village Enterprises, Openness and Regional
Economic Growth in China. Post-Communist Economies 13:2, 229-241. [Crossref]
1162. Jonathan Eaton, Samuel Kortum. 2001. Trade in capital goods. European Economic Review 45:7,
1195-1235. [Crossref]
1163. T Gylfason. 2001. Natural resources, education, and economic development. European Economic
Review 45:4-6, 847-859. [Crossref]
1164. R Muradian. 2001. Trade and the environment: from a 'Southern' perspective. Ecological Economics
36:2, 281-297. [Crossref]
1165. IMF. Research Dept.. World Economic Outlook, October 2001: The Information Technology
Revolution . [Crossref]
1166. Dani Rodrik. 2001. Les mirages de l'ouverture extérieure. L'Économie politique 10:2, 44. [Crossref]
1167. Geoffrey J. Bannister. 2001. International Trade and Poverty Alleviation. IMF Working Papers 01:54,
1. [Crossref]
1168. Gary G. Moser, Toshihiro Ichida. 2001. Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction in Sub-Saharan
Africa. IMF Working Papers 01:112, 1. [Crossref]
1169. Alberto Alesina,, Enrico Spolaore,, Romain Wacziarg. 2000. Economic Integration and Political
Disintegration. American Economic Review 90:5, 1276-1296. [Abstract] [View PDF article] [PDF with
links]
1170. Geoffrey Garrett. 2000. The Causes of Globalization. Comparative Political Studies 33:6-7, 941-991.
[Crossref]
1171. Leandro Prados de la Escosura. 2000. International Comparisons of Real Product, 1820–1990: An
Alternative Data Set. Explorations in Economic History 37:1, 1-41. [Crossref]
1172. Alberto Chong, L. Zanforlin. 2000. Technological Adaptation, Trade, and Growth. IMF Working
Papers 00:161, 1. [Crossref]
1173. Ehsan U. Choudhri, Dalia Hakura. 2000. International Trade and Productivity Growth: Exploring
the Sectoral Effects for Developing Countries. IMF Working Papers 00:17, 1. [Crossref]
1174. Michael Shin, Michael D. Ward. 1999. Lost in Space. Journal of Conflict Resolution 43:6, 793-817.
[Crossref]
1175. Matthew Lockwood. 7. Will a Marshall Plan for Africa Make Poverty History? 67-80. [Crossref]
1176. Julius Court, Simon Maxwell. 1. Policy Entrepreneurship For Poverty Reduction: Bridging Research
and Policy in International Development 1-16. [Crossref]
1177. Julius Court, Simon Maxwell. Back Matter - Policy Entrepreneurship for Poverty Reduction 121-142.
[Crossref]
1178. Naresh C. Saxena. 3. Bridging Research and Policy in India 25-38. [Crossref]
1179. John Young. 2. Research, Policy and Practice: Why Developing Countries are Different 17-24.
[Crossref]
1180. Matthew Taylor. 4. Bridging Research and Policy: A UK Perspective; Discussion 39-50. [Crossref]
1181. Maureen O’Neil. 5. What Determines the Influence That Research Has on Policy-Making? 51-56.
[Crossref]
1182. Andrew Sumner, Tiwari Meera. 8. Poverty and Economic Policy: What Happens When Researchers
Disagree? 81-88. [Crossref]
1183. Kenneth King, Robert Palmer, Rachel Hayman. 9. Bridging Research and Policy on Education,
Training and Their Enabling Environments 89-102. [Crossref]
1184. Tony Addison, George Mavrotas, Mark McGillivray. 10. Development Assistance and Development
Finance: Evidence and Global Policy Agendas 103-120. [Crossref]
1185. Julius Court, Simon Maxwell. Prelims - Policy Entrepreneurship for Poverty Reduction i-xiv.
[Crossref]
1186. Masood Ahmed. 6. Bridging Research and Policy: lessons and possibilities; Discussion 57-66.
[Crossref]
1187. Joseph F. Francois, Will Martin. Chapter 13 Ex Ante Assessment of the Welfare Impacts of Trade
Reforms with Numerical Models 379-434. [Crossref]
1188. Amal Nagah Elbeshbishi, Ebtihaj A. Al A'ali. Evaluating the Impact of Trade Liberalization on
Women With Special Reference to the Kingdom of Bahrain 152-177. [Crossref]
1189. Samuel Adams, Edem Kwame Mensah Klobodu. Urbanization, Financial Development, and
Sustainable Development in West Africa 155-177. [Crossref]
1190. Mehtap Isik. Making Innovation Development Policies Work for MENA 74-104. [Crossref]
1191. William Amone. Global Market Trends 16-36. [Crossref]
1192. Tarkan Cavusoglu, Debi Konukcu Onal. The Role of Institutional Quality on Total Factor
Productivity 98-126. [Crossref]
1193. William Amone. Global Market Trends 37-58. [Crossref]
1194. . The Empirical Growth Literature The Empirical Growth Literature 104-141. [Crossref]
1195. . Analysis of Trade-Growth Nexus 247-271. [Crossref]
1196. Muhammad Arshad Kahn. Does Financial Liberalization and Trade Openness Promote Growth in
South Asia? 101-132. [Crossref]
1197. Sailesh Tanna, Kitja Topaiboul, Chengchun Li. The Relative Importance of Trade vs. FDI-Led
Economic Growth in Thailand 105-122. [Crossref]
1198. Oxana Koukhartchouk, Mathilde Maurel. Chapitre IX. Institutions and Trade in Transition
économies 173-194. [Crossref]
1199. Philippe Hugon. Crise et mondialisation : la place du second monde émergent et du Tiers monde
247-264. [Crossref]