Search

Search Results

• 1. [Article] Central America: An Attempt at Modern Economic Growth

  Since World War II the five historic Central American nations, Costa Rica, EI Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua, underwent a period of aggregate economic growth which was followed by a collapse ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Central America: An Attempt at Modern Economic Growth Author: Kibbey, Richard Year: 1993 Since World War II the five historic Central American nations, Costa Rica, EI Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua, underwent a period of aggregate economic growth which was followed by a collapse of dramatic proportions. All five countries experienced an economic downturn in the latter 1970s which led to several years of declining GDP and GDP per capita, together with an economic and social disarray which is typically referred to as "la crisis" in Central American literature. The intent of this study is to present an argument for the position that the economic collapse of the five Central American nations was due in considerable part to their failure to pursue economic development in a manner which would generate sustainable increase. Based on a conception of modern economic growth and the statistical studies of Simon Kuznets and others since the 1940s, a set of indicators was selected for the purpose of clarifying the structural transformation referred to as economic development. This formulation of economic development was then used to distinguish the process from the simple aggregate expansion known as economic growth. The economic development indicators were also applied to the statistical records of two east Asian economies which were comparable in many respects to the Central American nations shortly after World War II. Both Taiwan and South Korea, like the nations of Central America, emerged from the 1940s as dominantly agricultural, dualistic, importers of manufactured consumer goods. The study begins with an examination of the growth versus development issue in economic theory, proceeds to discussion of the historical record of the two sets of nations, consideration of the indicators, evaluation of the data, and conclusions based on the data. The development indicators clearly distinguish the records of the Central American nations from those of the east Asians. Whereas both Taiwan and South Korea illustrate the expectations of structural transformation in economic development as defined by Simon Kuznets, the Central American nations obviously do not. Conclusions are drawn that the policies which were followed by the two east Asian nations generated the complex structural transformation which characterizes an industrialized economy. The strictly market driven policies of Central America, on the other hand, generated simple aggregate growth for a number of years without a change in the structure of the economy. The study presents evidence that the Central American nations avoided structural change during the post-World War II period in anticipation of receiving the benefits of growth without undergoing the costs of a change in structure. Such a change in structure would have required reorganization of long-standing historic patterns of national social, economic and political interaction. Title: Central America: An Attempt at Modern Economic Growth Author: Kibbey, Richard Year: 1993 Since World War II the five historic Central American nations, Costa Rica, EI Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua, underwent a period of aggregate economic growth which was followed by a collapse of dramatic proportions. All five countries experienced an economic downturn in the latter 1970s which led to several years of declining GDP and GDP per capita, together with an economic and social disarray which is typically referred to as "la crisis" in Central American literature. The intent of this study is to present an argument for the position that the economic collapse of the five Central American nations was due in considerable part to their failure to pursue economic development in a manner which would generate sustainable increase. Based on a conception of modern economic growth and the statistical studies of Simon Kuznets and others since the 1940s, a set of indicators was selected for the purpose of clarifying the structural transformation referred to as economic development. This formulation of economic development was then used to distinguish the process from the simple aggregate expansion known as economic growth. The economic development indicators were also applied to the statistical records of two east Asian economies which were comparable in many respects to the Central American nations shortly after World War II. Both Taiwan and South Korea, like the nations of Central America, emerged from the 1940s as dominantly agricultural, dualistic, importers of manufactured consumer goods. The study begins with an examination of the growth versus development issue in economic theory, proceeds to discussion of the historical record of the two sets of nations, consideration of the indicators, evaluation of the data, and conclusions based on the data. The development indicators clearly distinguish the records of the Central American nations from those of the east Asians. Whereas both Taiwan and South Korea illustrate the expectations of structural transformation in economic development as defined by Simon Kuznets, the Central American nations obviously do not. Conclusions are drawn that the policies which were followed by the two east Asian nations generated the complex structural transformation which characterizes an industrialized economy. The strictly market driven policies of Central America, on the other hand, generated simple aggregate growth for a number of years without a change in the structure of the economy. The study presents evidence that the Central American nations avoided structural change during the post-World War II period in anticipation of receiving the benefits of growth without undergoing the costs of a change in structure. Such a change in structure would have required reorganization of long-standing historic patterns of national social, economic and political interaction. Close

• 2. [Article] The Effectiveness of Public Development Banks: Designing Good Impact Evaluations

  PDB programs have become a fundamental ingredient of productive development policy strategies in most emerging economies. Although the overall need for these interventions is rarely questioned, academics ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: The Effectiveness of Public Development Banks: Designing Good Impact Evaluations Author: Maffioli, Alessandro, Rodriguez, Cesar M. Year: 2013 PDB programs have become a fundamental ingredient of productive development policy strategies in most emerging economies. Although the overall need for these interventions is rarely questioned, academics and policymakers often debate their effectiveness, as well as the optimal approaches and instruments necessary to implement them. Therefore, the need to produce rigorous evaluations of PDBs has become increasingly relevant for both government and civil society (see Chapter 2). This chapter presents the main concepts and operational arguments regarding the execution of indepth impact evaluations of PDB initiatives and instruments. For a more practical approach, these arguments are presented with examples of such evaluations, which have either ended or are ongoing, as well as of other programs that relate to their activities. This, however, limits the scope of this chapter. First, only one key aspect of the evaluation process is included: the attribution of effects. This suggests that all the methods and techniques covered address the fundamental problem of identifying the causal relationship between public policy intervention and the observed changes in the study’s target population. Other important elements relating to a comprehensive evaluation process—such as efficiency, relevance, and institutional coherence—fall beyond the scope of this analysis. Second, only quantitative approaches are included, in order to solve the problem of attribution. This does not, in any way, imply that the contribution made by the qualitative approaches to the study of PDBs is not appreciated. On the contrary, quantitative and qualitative approaches are complementary, but much more exhaustive studies are required to include both. This chapter focuses mainly on the methodological literature based on counterfactual analysis, which stems from applying experimental and quasi-experimental methods to the evaluation of public policy. Interventions that are applicable to a PDB can cover a wider range of sectors than can be dealt with in one chapter alone. Therefore, the analysis and discussion in this chapter is restricted to those PDB initiatives that improve access to credit for the productive sector (business and agriculture). As such, it is possible to discuss more specific ideas and suggestions, while acknowledging that the complexity and characteristics of PDB programs call for more specific studies. The rest of this chapter is structured as follows. It begins with a section posing the most important questions that are (or should be) included in any study of PDB effectiveness. The following section will identify the most commonly used indicators in these studies and the potential sources of information needed to establish such indicators. Later, the chapter analyzes the methods to respond to important questions relating to an evaluation, thus ensuring that the effects are correctly attributed. The final section explores the resources required to carry out a rigorous PDB evaluation. Title: The Effectiveness of Public Development Banks: Designing Good Impact Evaluations Author: Maffioli, Alessandro, Rodriguez, Cesar M. Year: 2013 PDB programs have become a fundamental ingredient of productive development policy strategies in most emerging economies. Although the overall need for these interventions is rarely questioned, academics and policymakers often debate their effectiveness, as well as the optimal approaches and instruments necessary to implement them. Therefore, the need to produce rigorous evaluations of PDBs has become increasingly relevant for both government and civil society (see Chapter 2). This chapter presents the main concepts and operational arguments regarding the execution of indepth impact evaluations of PDB initiatives and instruments. For a more practical approach, these arguments are presented with examples of such evaluations, which have either ended or are ongoing, as well as of other programs that relate to their activities. This, however, limits the scope of this chapter. First, only one key aspect of the evaluation process is included: the attribution of effects. This suggests that all the methods and techniques covered address the fundamental problem of identifying the causal relationship between public policy intervention and the observed changes in the study’s target population. Other important elements relating to a comprehensive evaluation process—such as efficiency, relevance, and institutional coherence—fall beyond the scope of this analysis. Second, only quantitative approaches are included, in order to solve the problem of attribution. This does not, in any way, imply that the contribution made by the qualitative approaches to the study of PDBs is not appreciated. On the contrary, quantitative and qualitative approaches are complementary, but much more exhaustive studies are required to include both. This chapter focuses mainly on the methodological literature based on counterfactual analysis, which stems from applying experimental and quasi-experimental methods to the evaluation of public policy. Interventions that are applicable to a PDB can cover a wider range of sectors than can be dealt with in one chapter alone. Therefore, the analysis and discussion in this chapter is restricted to those PDB initiatives that improve access to credit for the productive sector (business and agriculture). As such, it is possible to discuss more specific ideas and suggestions, while acknowledging that the complexity and characteristics of PDB programs call for more specific studies. The rest of this chapter is structured as follows. It begins with a section posing the most important questions that are (or should be) included in any study of PDB effectiveness. The following section will identify the most commonly used indicators in these studies and the potential sources of information needed to establish such indicators. Later, the chapter analyzes the methods to respond to important questions relating to an evaluation, thus ensuring that the effects are correctly attributed. The final section explores the resources required to carry out a rigorous PDB evaluation. Close