貿(mào)易開放度與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)：是出口導(dǎo)向型的增長(zhǎng)還是進(jìn)口導(dǎo)向型的增長(zhǎng)外文翻譯（已處理）

貿(mào)易開放度與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)：是出口導(dǎo)向型的增長(zhǎng)還是進(jìn)口導(dǎo)向型的增長(zhǎng)外文翻譯本科畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯原文外文題目:Tradeopennessandeconomicgrowth:isgrowthexport-ledorimport-led出處:AppliedEconomics2008,40,161?173作者:TitusO.Awokuse原文:Tradeopennessandeconomicgrowth:isgrowthexport-ledorimport-led?Mostpreviousinvestigationshaveonlyfocusedontheeffectofexportexpansiononeconomicgrowthwhileignoringthepotentialgrowth-enhancingcontributionofimports.Thisarticlere-examinestherelationshipbetweentradeandeconomicgrowthinArgentina,Colombia,andPeruwithemphasisonboththeroleofexportsandimports.Grangercausalitytestsandimpulseresponsefunctionswereusedtoexaminewhethergrowthintradestimulateeconomicgrowthorviceversa.Theresultssuggestthatthesingularfocusofpaststudiesonexportsastheengineofgrowthmaybemisleading.Althoughthereissomeempiricalevidencesupportingexport-ledgrowth,theempiricalsupportforimport-ledgrowthhypothesisisrelativelystronger.Insomecases,thereisalsoevidenceforreversecausalityfromgrossdomesticproductgrowthtoexportsandimportsI.IntroductionThepotentialbenefitofoutward-orientedtradepolicyforeconomicgrowthhasbeenthesubjectofmanyempiricalinvestigations.Althoughseveralstudieshavedemonstratedthetheoreticaleconomicrelationshipbetweentradeandeconomicgrowth,disagreementsstillpersistsregardingthecausaldirectionandmagnitudeoftheeffectsBhagwati,1978;Edwards,1998.Thevastmajorityofthisliteraturefocusesonthecausaleffectofexportoneconomicgrowth.Themainquestionintheexportled-growthdebateiswhetheranexport-drivenoutwardorientingtradepolicyispreferabletoaninwardorientingtradepolicyinstimulatingeconomicgrowth.Someresearchersarguethatcausalityflowsfromexportstoeconomicgrowthanddenotesthisastheexport-ledgrowthELGhypothesis.Thereversecausalflowfromeconomicgrowthtoexportsistermedgrowth-ledexportsGLE.Thethirdalternativeisthatofimport-ledgrowthILGwhichsuggeststhateconomicgrowthcouldbedrivenprimarilybygrowthinimportsDespitethepotentiallyimportantroleofimportsandimportcompetition,relativelylittleattentionhasbeendevotedtothecausalrelationshipbetweenimportsandeconomicgrowth.Moststudiesontheeffectoftradeopennessongrowthhaveprimarilyfocusedontheroleofexportsandhavemostlyignoredthecontributionofimports.However,somerecentstudieshaveshownthatwithoutcontrollingforimports,anyobservedcausallinkbetweenexportsandeconomicgrowthmaybespuriousandthusmisleadingEsfahani,1991;Riezmanetal.,1996;ThangaveluandRajaguru,2004.Importsmaybeveryimportanttoeconomicgrowthsincesignificantexportgrowthisusuallyassociatedwithrapidimportgrowth.Furthermore,theexport-growthanalysesthatexcludeimportsmaybesubjecttotheclassicomittedvariableproblem.ThefundamentalcausalrelationshipmayactuallybebetweenimportsandeconomicgrowthAlthoughnumerousempiricalstudieshaveinvestigatedtheroleofexportsineconomicgrowth,theylargelyfocusedonAsianeconomies,withfewstudiesincludingLatinAmericacountries.Earlierintheireconomicdevelopmentpaths,manyLatinAmericaneconomiesmostlyfollowedprotectionisttradepoliciesemphasizingtheimportsubstitutionindustrializationstrategy.Thecurrentprevailingviewamongmostdevelopmenteconomistsisthattheimport-substitutionapproachisdetrimentaltoeconomicgrowthasitinherentlyfostersproductioninefficienciesandencouragesrent-seekingbehaviour.Inrecentyears,manyLatinAmericancountrieshaveexperiencedmajormacroeconomicandtradepolicyreformswithemphasisonmarketliberalizationandtradeopenness.ThefewexistingempiricalinvestigationsoftheeffectofopennessongrowthinthisregionhaveproducedmixedandinconclusiveresultsRiezmanetal.,1996;Xu,1996;Bahmani-OskooeeandNiroomand,1999;Richards,2001ThisstudyinvestigatesthecausalrelationshipbetweentradeandeconomicgrowthforthreeLatinAmericaneconomiesArgentina,ColombiaandPeruwithinanintegratedframeworkthatexplorestheroleofbothexportsandimports.Thisstudymakescontributionstotheliteratureinseveralways.First,incontrasttomostpreviousstudiesoftheELGhypothesis,thisstudyextendsthetraditionalneoclassicalgrowthmodelbyestimatinganaugmentedproductionfunctionthatexplicitlytestsfortheeffectofbothexportsandimportsoneconomicgrowth.RealexportsandimportsareincludedastwooftheendogenousvariablesinthecointegratedvectorautoregressionVARmodel.ThismodellingframeworkalsomakesitpossibletotestforboththeELGandILGhypothesesfortheseLatinAmericaneconomies.Second,thearticlealsoadoptsrecentadvancesintimeseriesmodellingbyspecifyingcausalmodelsbasedonvectorerrorcorrectionmodelsTodaandPhillips,1993.Thus,inadditiontotestingforGrangercausalitybetweenexports,importsandgrowth,long-runbehaviourcouldalsobeinvestigatedviacointegrationandimpulseresponsefunctionIRFanalysesTherestofthisarticleisorganizedasfollows.SectionIIprovidesabrieftheoreticalandempiricaloverviewofthetradeandgrowthrelationship.SectionIIIdiscussestheanalyticalframeworkandsomemethodologicalissues.SectionIVpresentsempiricalfindingsandSectionVcontainstheconcludingremarksII.Exports,ImportsandEconomicGrowthTheoreticalframeworkTherelationshipbetweenexportsandeconomicgrowthhasbeenattributedtothepotentialpositiveexternalitiesderivedfromexposuretoforeignmarkets.Morespecifically,exportscanbeviewedasanengineofgrowthinthreeways.First,exportexpansioncanbeacatalystforoutputgrowthdirectlyasacomponentofaggregateoutput.Anincreaseinforeigndemandfordomesticexportableproductscancauseanoverallgrowthinoutputviaanincreaseinemploymentandincomeintheexportablesector.Second,exportgrowthcanalsoaffectgrowthindirectlythroughvariousroutessuchas:efficientresourceallocation,greatercapacityutilization,exploitationofeconomiesofscaleandstimulationoftechnologicalimprovementduetoforeignmarketcompetitionHelpmanandKrugman,1985.Exportgrowthallowsfirmstotakeadvantageofeconomiesofscalethatareexternaltofirmsinthenonexportsectorbutinternaltotheoveralleconomy.Third,expandedexportscanprovideforeignexchangethatallowsforincreasinglevelsofimportsofintermediategoodsthatinturnraisescapitalformationandthusstimulateoutputgrowthBalassa,1978;Esfahani,1991RelativetothecaseforELG,expandedimportshavethepotentialtoplayacomplementaryroleinstimulatingoveralleconomicperformance.Itisplausibletoassumethattheeffectofimportsoneconomicgrowthmaybedifferentfromthatofexports.Forinstance,inmanysmallopendevelopingeconomies,importsprovidemuchneededfactorsofproductionemployedintheexportsector.Also,thetransferoftechnologyfromdevelopedtodevelopingcountriesviaimportscouldserveasanimportantsourceofeconomicgrowth.Endogenousgrowthmodelsshowthatimportscanbeachannelforlong-runeconomicgrowthbecauseitprovidesdomesticfirmsaccesstoforeigntechnologyandknowledgeGrossmanandHelpman,1991;CoeandHelpman,1995.ForeignR&Dknowledgecouldbeanimportantsourceofproductivitygrowthascutting-edgetechnologiesareusuallybundledwithimportedintermediategoodssuchascomputers,precisionmachinesandequipments.Thus,foreignimportsaresourcesoftechnology-intensiveintermediatefactorsofproductionLawrenceandWeinstein,1999;Mazumdar,2001.Inasense,importsasamediumoftechnologytransfermayplayamoresignificantroleoneconomicgrowththanexportsTradeopennessandeconomicgrowthInaddition,beyondservingasavehiclefortechnologytransfer,importscanalsoaffectproductivitygrowththroughitseffectondomesticinnovationviaimportcompetition.Anincreaseinimportpenetrationexposesthedomesticfirmstoforeigncompetition.Althoughtheimpactofimportpenetrationmaydifferacrossdomesticindustries,importsareimportanttoproductivitygrowthbecauseincreasedimportsofcompetingproductsspurinnovationasdomesticproducersrespondtothetechnologicalcompetitivepressurefromforeigncompetitionLawrenceandWeinstein,1999ReviewoftheempiricalliteratureSincetradetheorydoesnotprovideadefinitiveguidanceonthecausalrelationshipbetweentradeandoutputgrowth,thedebateisusuallyinformedbyinferencesbasedonanecdotalintuitionandempiricalanalyses.Thereisextensiveliteraturefocusingontherelationshipbetweentradeandgrowthwithmanyespousingtheadvantagesofoutward-orientedtradepolicies.Thesestudiesemphasizethebenefitsofexportpromotionoverthedisadvantagesofinward-orientedtradepoliciesofimportsubstitutionindustrializationadoptedbyseveraldevelopingcountriespost-WorldWarIIBalassa,1978.Theyciteasevidencethesuccessoftheoutward-orientedAsianeconomiese.g.HongKong,Korea,SingaporeandTaiwanincontrasttotheeconomicfailuresofinward-orienteddevelopingcountriese.g.IndiaandLatinAmerica.MostLatinAmericancountriesmaintainedtheirinward-orientedtradepoliciesuntilthe1980swhentheywereforcedbyinternationallendingagenciese.g.InternationalMonetaryFundandtheWorldBanktoadoptcomprehensivestructuraladjustmentprogramsthatemphasizedeconomicreformsandmarketliberalizationpoliciesThevolumesofempiricalevidenceontheELGhypothesishaveshownthatthereisanotablelinkbetweengrossdomesticproductGDPgrowthandexportgrowth.Butcontroversiesstillsurroundthedirectionofcausality.AlthoughmoststudiesfocusondevelopingcountriesBalassa,1978;Sheehey,1992,severalresearchershavealsoexaminedtheELGhypothesisforindustrializedcountriesSharmaetal.,1991;Ghartey,1993;Awokuse,2003,2006;DarandAmirkhalkhali,2003.WhilesomeresearchersfoundevidenceinsupportoftheELGhypothesis,otherseitherfoundevidenceinsupportofthealternativeGLEhypothesisorinseveralcasestheempiricalevidenceindicatedabi-directionalcausalrelationshipVandenBergandSchmidt,1994;Xu,1996;Riezmanetal.,1996;GilesandWilliams,2000Earlierstudiesthatanalysedthelinkbetweentradeandeconomicgrowthprimarilyfocusedontheroleofexportsandmostadoptedabivariatecorrelationmodellingframework.Later,severalcross-countystudiesexaminedtheexport-growthnexuswithinaneoclassicalgrowthmodellingframeworkBalassa,1978;Ram,1987.Mostofthesecross-sectionalstudiesfoundasignificantandpositiverelationshipbetweenexportperformanceandnationaloutputgrowth.Forinstance,JungandMarshall1985appliedGrangercausalityteststodatafrom37developingcountriesandfoundweaksupportfortheELGhypothesis.InasimilarcausalitystudybyChow1987,hefoundstrongbi-directionalcausalrelationshipbetweenexportgrowthandindustrialgrowthineightnewlyindustrializingcountriesHowever,resultsfromearlierstudiesusingordinaryleastsquaresregressionandsimplecorrelationcoefficienttestshavesignificantlimitationsasthecorrelationsmaybespuriousbecausetheyfailedtoaccountforthedata’sdynamictimeseriespropertiese.g.unitrootsandcointegration.Also,theresultsarelimitedtoshowingonlythatexportsgrowthandGDPgrowtharecorrelated,butcouldnotprovideinformationonthedirectionofcausality.Theissueofcausalityisdynamicinnatureandisbestexaminedusingadynamictimeseriesmodellingframework.Furthermore,theimplicitassumptionofsameproductionfunctionacrossdifferenttypesofeconomiesmaybeunrealisticastheleveloftechnologymayvaryacrosscountriesAidedbyrecentadvancementsintimeseriesmodellingtechniquescointegrationanderrorcorrectionmodels,therehasbeenanincreaseincountry-specificstudiesfocusingontherelationshipbetweenexportperformanceandeconomicgrowthBiswalandDhawan,1998;Richards,2001;Awokuse,2003,2006.Thesemorerecentstudiesaddressthemethodologicalissuesofnonstationarityofvariablesandexplicitlyaccountsfortheexistenceoflong-runcointegratingrelationshipsbycorrectlyapplyingerrorcorrectionmodellingECMtechniques.Ingeneral,empiricalevidencefromthesestudiesoftheELGhypothesishasbeenmixed.Whileseveralofthesestudieshavedocumentedempiricalevidencesupportingtheexistenceofalong-runrelationshipbetweenexportsandeconomicgrowthsomeothershaverejectedtheELGhypothesisInthecontextofLatinAmericaneconomies,severalearliercross-sectionalstudiesincludedthesecountriesJungandMarshall,1985;Ram,1987.However,fewrecentcountry-specificstudieshaveexaminedtherelationshipbetweenexportsandeconomicgrowthinLatinAmericausinganaugmentedneoclassicalproductionfunctionandmoderntimeserieseconometrictechniquesVandenBergandSchmidt,1994;Richards,2001.Forexample,Bahmani-Oskooeeetal.1991appliesbivariateGrangercausalityteststoexaminetheELGhypothesisfor20developingcountriesover1951?1987annualdataandfoundthatPeru’sdatasupportstheELGhypothesiswhileabi-directionalcausalrelationshipwasfoundfortheDominicanRepublicandParaguay.VandenBergandSchmidt1994alsoinvestigatedtheELGhypothesisfor16LatinAmericancountriesandfoundcointegrationin11ofthe16countriesexamined.Specifically,theyfoundapositiveandsignificanteffectofexportsoneconomicgrowthinColombiaandPeru,butnosignificanteffectwasfoundforArgentina.Inanotherstudyinvolving32developingcountriesincludingsomefromLatinAmerica,Xu1996usedbivariateGrangercausalitytestsanderrorcorrectionmodelstoexamineexportandeconomicgrowthrelationships.HefoundsupportfortheELGhypothesisinColombia,butnotforArgentinaRiezmanetal.1996investigatedtheELGhypothesisfor126countries.Usingannualdataover1950?1990,theyfound‘thatstandardmethodsofdetectingELGusingGrangercausalitytestsmaygivemisleadingresultsifimportsarenotincludedinthesystembeinganalysed’.Inbivariatecausalityanalysis,theELGhypothesiswasconfirmedforonly16ofthe126countriesandthenumberofcasesincreasedtojust30aftercontrollingforimports.InthecaseofLatinAmericancountries,theyfoundsupportfortheELGhypothesisforonlyfourcountriesCostaRica,Honduras,SurinameandUruguay.NosignificantELGevidencewasfoundforthethreecountriesinthiscurrentstudyArgentina,ColombiaandPeru.Itwouldbeinterestingtoexamineiftheseresultsstillholdforpost-1990LatinAmericandata.譯文:貿(mào)易開放度與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng):是出口導(dǎo)向型的增長(zhǎng)還是進(jìn)口導(dǎo)向型的增長(zhǎng)過去的研究很多僅僅集中在擴(kuò)大出口對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響,而忽略了進(jìn)口對(duì)促進(jìn)增長(zhǎng)的潛在貢獻(xiàn)。本文重新審視了阿根廷、哥倫比亞、秘魯貿(mào)易與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)之間的關(guān)系,同時(shí)又注重進(jìn)口與出口產(chǎn)生的作用。格蘭杰因果關(guān)系檢驗(yàn)法和脈沖響應(yīng)函數(shù)用來研究貿(mào)易增長(zhǎng)是否刺激經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)(或相反)。該結(jié)果表明,過去的研究聚焦在出口作為經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的單一發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)可能是種誤導(dǎo)。雖然有一些實(shí)證支持出口導(dǎo)向型經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng),實(shí)證支持進(jìn)口導(dǎo)向型的經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的假設(shè)也相對(duì)增多。在某些情況下,也有進(jìn)出口對(duì)國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值增長(zhǎng)存在反向因果關(guān)系的實(shí)證。前言外向型貿(mào)易政策對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的潛在利益一直以來都是許多實(shí)證調(diào)查的主題。雖然有幾個(gè)研究證明貿(mào)易與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的理論經(jīng)濟(jì)關(guān)系,就因果關(guān)系研究方向和影響程度方面,分歧仍然存在的(Bhagwati,1978年;愛德華茲,1998年)。絕大多數(shù)文獻(xiàn)集中在出口對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的因果效應(yīng)分析上面。出口導(dǎo)向型增長(zhǎng)爭(zhēng)論的主要問題是,在推動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)方面,出口導(dǎo)向型對(duì)外定向的貿(mào)易政策是否比進(jìn)口導(dǎo)向型對(duì)外定向的貿(mào)易政策更可取呢?一些研究人員在爭(zhēng)論出口與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的因果關(guān)系流向,并表示把出口拉動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)作為出口導(dǎo)向經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)(ELG)假說。反向因果流向即經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)促進(jìn)出口增長(zhǎng),被稱為經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)導(dǎo)向的出口(ELG)假說。第三種選擇是進(jìn)口帶動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)(ILG),這表明經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)可能主要受到進(jìn)口增長(zhǎng)影響。盡管進(jìn)口貿(mào)易和進(jìn)口競(jìng)爭(zhēng)潛在的重要作用,相關(guān)地不太注重一直致力于進(jìn)口貿(mào)易和經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)之間的因果關(guān)系。在大多數(shù)貿(mào)易開放對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響研究主要把重點(diǎn)放在出口的作用上,大多忽視了進(jìn)口的貢獻(xiàn)。然而,一些最近的研究表明,如果不控制進(jìn)口,出口和經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)之間的因果關(guān)系的一些觀察模式可能是虛假的,因此誤導(dǎo)(Esfahani,1991年;Riezmanetal.,1996;Thangavelu和Rajaguru,2004)。因?yàn)橹卮蟮某隹谠鲩L(zhǎng)與進(jìn)口增長(zhǎng)分析可能受到遺漏經(jīng)典變量的問題。最根本的因果關(guān)系實(shí)際上可能是進(jìn)口與經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的關(guān)系。雖然有大量的實(shí)證研究調(diào)查出口對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的作用,他們主要集中在亞洲經(jīng)濟(jì)體,包括少量的拉美國(guó)家的一些研究。此前,在他們經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展道路上,許多拉美經(jīng)濟(jì)體大多遵循貿(mào)易保護(hù)主義政策,強(qiáng)調(diào)進(jìn)口替代的工業(yè)化戰(zhàn)略。當(dāng)前在眾多發(fā)展經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家中最普遍的觀點(diǎn)是,進(jìn)口替代的方法對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)有害,因?yàn)樗举|(zhì)上助長(zhǎng)生產(chǎn)效率低下的生產(chǎn)方式和鼓勵(lì)尋租的行為。近年來,許多拉美國(guó)家經(jīng)歷了在強(qiáng)調(diào)市場(chǎng)自由化和貿(mào)易開放的基礎(chǔ)上重大的宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)和貿(mào)易政策的改革。少量存在的幾個(gè)關(guān)于開放對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響的實(shí)證調(diào)查在該范圍產(chǎn)生了混合和不確