Browse

You are looking at 1 - 1 of 1 items for :

  • Type: Journal Issue x
  • Population & migration geography x
  • Cross country analysis x
  • National Government Expenditures and Related Policies: General x
  • External sector x
  • Middle East and Central Asia x
  • Public finance & taxation x
  • Population and demographics x
  • Economic Theory x
  • International Economics x
  • Public Finance x
  • Education: General x
  • Earth Sciences, Geography, Environment x
  • Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations x
  • Society and Social Sciences x
  • Health, Education, and Welfare x
  • Refine By Language: English x
Clear All Modify Search
Mr. Andreas Billmeier and Tommaso Nannicini
Studies of the impact of trade openness on growth are based either on cross-country analysis-which lacks transparency-or case studies-which lack statistical rigor. We apply transparent econometric methods drawn from the treatment evaluation literature to make the comparison between treated (i.e., open) and control (i.e., closed) countries explicit while remaining within a unified statistical framework. First, matching estimators highlight the rather far-fetched country comparisons underlying common cross-country results. When appropriately restricting the sample, we confirm a positive and significant effect of openness on growth. Second, we apply synthetic control methods-which account for endogeneity due to unobservable heterogeneity-to countries that liberalized their trade regime and we show that trade liberalization has often had a positive effect on growth.