Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Governance, Financial Liberalization, and Financial Development in SubSaharan Africa John A Karikari * Assistant Director Center for Economics US Government Accountability Office (GAO) Washington, DC, USA African Finance & Economics Association (AFEA) President-Elect www.afea.info www.afea.net *The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the GAO or the US federal government. karikari: govn & findev aec2010 1 Overview Motivation Literature Review Methodology • Model • Data Results Discussion & Conclusion karikari: govn & findev aec2010 2 Motivation SSA has shallow financial markets & face the challenge of deepening & strengthening them Attempts have been made to liberalize financial markets But, low quality of institutions & governance could be limiting the impact of financial liberalization o SSA lag substantially in quality of governance & costs of doing business What are the roles of financial liberalization & governance in financial development? karikari: govn & findev aec2010 3 Motivation (contd) Consequences of the low financial development o o Limited & inadequate access to capital has varied effects on the economy (AfDB, 2010) Low productivity in agric in rural areas Limits contributions of SMEs to private dev Slows financial dev in oil-exporting countries with a huge capital assets tied to oil prices Countries successful in attracting private capital inflows have better financial markets, institutional quality, and more integrated globally in financial and trade flows (IMF, 2010) karikari: govn & findev aec2010 4 Literature Review karikari: govn & findev aec2010 5 Methodology Model: o o o o FDEV: Private credit by deposit banks (Beck et al., 2000) FLIB: Financial liberalization (Chinn-Itoh index, 2008) GOVN: World Bank’s World Governance Indicators (WGI) LGO: Legal origins by World Legal Systems Research Group o o Common law (CMN), civil law (CVL), or mixed system (MXD) X: Other factors o Macroeconomic factors (World Bank’s WDI) GDP, Inflation rate, Govt expenditure, Aid BCRISIS in late 1980s/early 1990s (IMF, 2006) o OILEXPORTR: Oil-exporting countries (IMF, 2006) o karikari: govn & findev aec2010 6 Methodology (contd) karikari: govn & findev aec2010 7 Methodology (contd) Financial Development in SSA, 1996-2008 Data are averages for 1996-2002 and 2003-2008 karikari: govn & findev aec2010 8 Methodology (contd) karikari: govn & findev aec2010 9 Methodology (contd) karikari: govn & findev aec2010 10 Estimation Results karikari: govn & findev aec2010 11 Estimation Results (contd) Table 3, col. 2: Impact of financial liberalization reduced with high governance, in 1996-2002 and Impact of financial liberalization enhanced with high governance, in 2003-2008 Why? • • A certain threshold of governance required for liberalization to be effective Government forbearance of weak, mostly state-owned banks in earlier period karikari: govn & findev aec2010 12 Estimation Results (contd) karikari: govn & findev aec2010 13 Estimation Results (contd) Table 4: Financial liberalization, by itself, was associated with lower financial development, particularly, in 19962002, contrary to McDonald & Schumacher (2007) Governance has negative impact in 1996-2002 that was offset by a positive impact in 2003-2008 Implication: o SSA require higher levels of good governance to fully benefit from financial liberalization Mixed legal systems, compared to civil laws favored financial development karikari: govn & findev aec2010 14 Estimation Results (contd) Other results (Table 3) Macroeconomic effects: Economic growth: Inconclusive o Inflation: Negative o Govt expenditure: Positive o Aid: Positive o Banking crisis: Negative Oil exporter: Negative Robustness checks Excluded South Africa (Table 3, col 3) Endogeneity of financial liberalization Dependent variable: Liquid liabilities (Table 3, col 4) Individual dimensions of governance (Table 5) karikari: govn & findev aec2010 15 Estimation Results (contd) karikari: govn & findev aec2010 16 Discussion & Conclusion Key Results/Policy Implications: o o o o o o Financial liberalization, by itself, did not improve financial development, contrary to previous studies The impact of governance, by itself, improved fin dev in 2003-2008 Governance improved impact of financial liberalization in 20032008, but worsened it in 1996-2002 Civil laws systems are less favorable to financial development, compared to mixed systems with common laws, consistent with previous studies Political instability is more powerful for financial development than rule of law, contrary to previous studies Banking crisis in the late 1980s/early 1990s has adverse effects on liquid liabilities Further Research/Discussion: o What is the appropriate definition of financial liberalization when explaining financial development? karikari: govn & findev aec2010 17