Lucas paradox

Last updated

In economics, the Lucas paradox or the Lucas puzzle is the observation that capital does not flow from developed countries to developing countries despite the fact that developing countries have lower levels of capital per worker. [1]

Contents

Classical economic theory predicts that capital should flow from rich countries to poor countries, due to the effect of diminishing returns of capital. Poor countries have lower levels of capital per worker – which explains, in part, why they are poor. In poor countries, the scarcity of capital relative to labor should mean that the returns related to the infusion of capital are higher than in developed countries. In response, savers in rich countries should look at poor countries as profitable places in which to invest. In reality, things do not seem to work that way. Surprisingly little capital flows from rich countries to poor countries. This puzzle, famously discussed in a paper by Robert Lucas in 1990, is often referred to as the "Lucas Paradox".

The theoretical explanations for the Lucas Paradox can be grouped into two categories. [2]

  1. The first group attributes the limited amount of capital received by poorer nations to differences in fundamentals that affect the production structure of the economy, such as technological differences, missing factors of production, government policies, and the institutional structure.
  2. The second group of explanations focuses on international capital market imperfections, mainly sovereign risk (risk of nationalization) and asymmetric information. Although the expected return on investment might be high in many developing countries, it does not flow there because of the high level of uncertainty associated with those expected returns.

Example: Development of Third World nations

Lucas’ seminal paper was a reaction to observed trends in international development efforts during the 20th century. Regions characterized by poverty, such as South Asia and Africa, have received particular attention with regard to the underinvestment predicted by Lucas. African nations, with their impoverished populace and rich natural resources, has been upheld as exemplifying the type of nations that would, under neoclassical assumptions, be able to offer extremely high returns to capital. The meager foreign capital African nations receive outside of the charity of multinational corporations reveals the extent to which Lucas captured the realities of today’s global capital flows. [3]

Authors more recently have focused their explanations for the paradox on Lucas’ first category of explanation, the difference in fundamentals of the production structure. Some have pointed to the quality of institutions as the key determinant of capital inflows to poorer nations. [4] As evidence for the central role played by institutional stability, it has been shown that the amount of foreign direct investment a country receives is highly correlated to the strength of infrastructure and the stability of government in that country. [5]

In many cases in Armenia, the Lucas paradox is confirmed․ Ineffective implementation of legal and legislative mechanisms, insufficient level of development of the financial sector, and ineffective allocation of high-quality human capital are possible reasons behind the low inflow of capital to the Republic of Armenia. [6]

Counterexample: American economic development

Although Lucas’ original hypothesis has widely been accepted as descriptive of the modern period in history, the paradox does not emerge as clearly before the 20th century. The colonial era, for instance, stands out as an age of unimpeded capital flows. The system of imperialism produced economic conditions particularly amenable to the movement of capital according to the assumptions of classical economics. Britain, for instance, was able to design, impose, and control the quality of institutions in its colonies to capitalize on the high returns to capital in the new world. [7]

Jeffrey Williamson has explored in depth this reversal of the Lucas Paradox in the colonial context. Although not emphasized by Lucas himself, Williamson maintains that unimpeded labor migration is one way that capital flows to the citizens of developing nations. The empire structure was particularly important for facilitating low-cost international migration, allowing wage rates to converge across the regions in the British Empire. [8] For instance, in the 17th and 18th century, England incentivized its citizens to move to the labor-scarce Americas, endorsing a system of indentured servitude to make overseas migration affordable.

While Britain enabled free capital flow from old to new world, the success of the American enterprise after the American Revolution is a good example of the role of institutional and legal frameworks for facilitating a continued flow of capital. The U.S. constitution’s commitment to private property rights, rights of personal liberty; and strong contract law enabled investment from Britain to America to continue even without the incentives of the colonial relationship. [9] In these ways, early American economic development, both pre and post-revolution, provides a case study for the conditions under which the Lucas Paradox is reversed. Even after the average income level in America exceeded that of Britain, the institutions exported under imperialism and the legal frameworks established after independence enabled long-term capital flows from Europe to America.[ citation needed ]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economic growth</span> Measure of increase in market value of goods

Economic growth can be defined as the increase or improvement in the inflation-adjusted market value of the goods and services produced by an economy in a financial year. Statisticians conventionally measure such growth as the percent rate of increase in the real and nominal gross domestic product (GDP).

Development economics is a branch of economics that deals with economic aspects of the development process in low- and middle- income countries. Its focus is not only on methods of promoting economic development, economic growth and structural change but also on improving the potential for the mass of the population, for example, through health, education and workplace conditions, whether through public or private channels.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human migration</span> Movement of people for their benefit

Human migration is the movement of people from one place to another with intentions of settling, permanently or temporarily, at a new location.

In economics, Dutch disease is the apparent causal relationship between the increase in the economic development of a specific sector and a decline in other sectors.

In economics, hot money is the flow of funds from one country to another in order to earn a short-term profit on interest rate differences and/or anticipated exchange rate shifts. These speculative capital flows are called "hot money" because they can move very quickly in and out of markets, potentially leading to market instability.

The idea of convergence in economics is the hypothesis that poorer economies' per capita incomes will tend to grow at faster rates than richer economies. In the Solow-Swan growth model, economic growth is driven by the accumulation of physical capital until this optimum level of capital per worker, which is the "steady state" is reached, where output, consumption and capital are constant. The model predicts more rapid growth when the level of physical capital per capita is low, something often referred to as “catch up” growth. As a result, all economies should eventually converge in terms of per capita income. Developing countries have the potential to grow at a faster rate than developed countries because diminishing returns are not as strong as in capital-rich countries. Furthermore, poorer countries can replicate the production methods, technologies, and institutions of developed countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theodore Schultz</span> American economist

Theodore William Schultz was an American Agricultural economist and chairman of the University of Chicago Department of Economics. Schultz rose to national prominence after winning the 1979 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kuznets curve</span> Hypothesized relationship between economic development and inequality level

The Kuznets curve expresses a hypothesis advanced by economist Simon Kuznets in the 1950s and 1960s. According to this hypothesis, as an economy develops, market forces first increase and then decrease economic inequality. The Kuznets curve appeared to be consistent with experience at the time it was proposed. However, since the 1970s, inequality has risen in the US and other developed countries, which invalidates the hypothesis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Heckscher–Ohlin model</span> Economic model for international trade

The Heckscher–Ohlin model is a general equilibrium mathematical model of international trade, developed by Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin at the Stockholm School of Economics. It builds on David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage by predicting patterns of commerce and production based on the factor endowments of a trading region. The model essentially says that countries export the products which use their relatively abundant and cheap factors of production, and import the products which use the countries' relatively scarce factors.

International economics is concerned with the effects upon economic activity from international differences in productive resources and consumer preferences and the international institutions that affect them. It seeks to explain the patterns and consequences of transactions and interactions between the inhabitants of different countries, including trade, investment and transaction.

The Solow–Swan model or exogenous growth model is an economic model of long-run economic growth. It attempts to explain long-run economic growth by looking at capital accumulation, labor or population growth, and increases in productivity largely driven by technological progress. At its core, it is an aggregate production function, often specified to be of Cobb–Douglas type, which enables the model "to make contact with microeconomics". The model was developed independently by Robert Solow and Trevor Swan in 1956, and superseded the Keynesian Harrod–Domar model.

The productivity paradox, also referred to as the Solow paradox, could refer either to the slowdown in productivity growth in the United States in the 1970s and 1980s despite rapid development in the field of information technology (IT) over the same period, or to the slowdown in productivity growth in the United States and developed countries from the 2000s to 2020s; sometimes the newer slowdown is referred to as the productivity slowdown, the productivity puzzle, or the productivity paradox 2.0. The 1970s to 1980s productivity paradox inspired many research efforts at explaining the slowdown, only for the paradox to disappear with renewed productivity growth in the developed countries in the 1990s. However, issues raised by those research efforts remain important in the study of productivity growth in general, and became important again when productivity growth slowed around the world again from the 2000s to the present day.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Remittance</span> Money transfer by a foreign worker to their home country

A remittance is a non-commercial transfer of money by a foreign worker, a member of a diaspora community, or a citizen with familial ties abroad, for household income in their home country or homeland. Money sent home by migrants competes with international aid as one of the largest financial inflows to developing countries. Workers' remittances are a significant part of international capital flows, especially with regard to labor-exporting countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mahmoud Mohieldin</span> Egyptian professor


Mahmoud Mohieldin, is an economist with more than 30 years of experience in international finance and development. He is the UN Climate Change High-Level Champion for Egypt. He is an Executive Director at the International Monetary Fund. He has been the United Nations Special Envoy on Financing the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda since February 2020. He was the Minister of Investment of Egypt from 2004-2010, and most recently, served as the World Bank Group Senior Vice President for the 2030 Development Agenda, United Nations Relations and Partnerships. His roles at the World Bank also included Managing Director, responsible for Human Development, Sustainable Development, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management, Finance and Private Sector Development, and the World Bank Institute; World Bank President's Special Envoy on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the Post-2015 Development Agenda, and Financing for Development; and Corporate Secretary and Executive Secretary to the Development Committee of the World Bank Group's Board of Governors. Dr Mohieldin also served on several Boards of Directors in the Central Bank of Egypt and the corporate sector. He was a member of the Commission on Growth and Development and was selected for the Young Global Leader of the World Economic Forum in 2005. His professional experience extends into the academic arena as a Professor of Economics and Finance at the Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Cairo University and as a Visiting Professor at several renowned Universities in Egypt, Korea, the UAE, the UK and the USA. He is a member of the International Advisory Board of Durham University Business School. He also holds leading positions in national, regional and international research centres and associations. He has authored numerous publications and articles in leading journals in the fields of economics, finance and development.

The Easterlin paradox is a finding in happiness economics formulated in 1974 by Richard Easterlin, then professor of economics at the University of Pennsylvania, and the first economist to study happiness data. The paradox states that at a point in time happiness varies directly with income both among and within nations, but over time happiness does not trend upward as income continues to grow: while people on higher incomes are typically happier than their lower-income counterparts at a given point in time, higher incomes don't produce greater happiness over time. One explanation is that my happiness depends on a comparison between my income and my perceptions of the average standard of living. If everyone's income increases, my increased income gives a short boost to my happiness, since I do not realize that the average standard of living has gone up. Some time later, I realize that the average standard of living has also gone up, so the happiness boost produced by my increased income disappears. It is the contradiction between the point-of-time and time series findings that is the root of the paradox: while there is a correlation at a fixed point, there is no trend over multiple points. That is, in the short run, everyone perceives increases in income to be correlated with happiness and tries to increase their incomes. However, in the long run, this proves to be an illusion, since everyone's efforts to raise standards of living lead to increasing averages, leaving everyone in the same place in terms of relative income. Various theories have been advanced to explain the Paradox, but the Paradox itself is solely an empirical generalization. The existence of the paradox has been strongly disputed by other researchers.

The Commitment to Development Index (CDI), published annually by the Center for Global Development, ranks the world's richest countries on their dedication to policies that benefit the five billion people living in poorer nations. Rich and poor countries are linked in many ways; thus the Index looks beyond standard comparisons of foreign aid flows. It measures "development-friendliness" of 40 of the world's richest countries, all member nations of the OECD's Development Assistance Committee. The CDI assesses national effort in seven policy areas: aid, trade, investment, migration, environment, security, and technology. It is considered to be a numerical targeting indicator for Goal 8 of the Millennium Development Goals. It shows that aid is about more than quantity – quality also matters – and that development policy is about more than aid. The Index penalizes countries that give with one hand, for instance through aid or investment, but take away with the other, through trade barriers or pollution.

The Feldstein–Horioka puzzle is a widely discussed problem in macroeconomics and international finance, which was first documented by Martin Feldstein and Charles Horioka in a 1980 paper. Economic theory assumes that if investors can easily invest anywhere in the world, acting rationally they would invest in countries offering the highest return per unit of investment. This would drive up the price of the investment until the return across different countries is similar.

Education economics or the economics of education is the study of economic issues relating to education, including the demand for education, the financing and provision of education, and the comparative efficiency of various educational programs and policies. From early works on the relationship between schooling and labor market outcomes for individuals, the field of the economics of education has grown rapidly to cover virtually all areas with linkages to education.

A global saving glut is a situation in which desired saving exceeds desired investment. By 2005 Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, the central bank of the United States, expressed concern about the "significant increase in the global supply of saving" and its implications for monetary policies, particularly in the United States. Although Bernanke's analyses focused on events in 2003 to 2007 that led to the 2007–2009 financial crisis, regarding GSG countries and the United States, excessive saving by the non-financial corporate sector (NFCS) is an ongoing phenomenon, affecting many countries. Bernanke's global saving glut (GSG) hypothesis argued that increased capital inflows to the United States from GSG countries were an important reason that U.S. longer-term interest rates from 2003 to 2007 were lower than expected.

Financial integration is a phenomenon in which financial markets in neighboring, regional and/or global economies are closely linked together. Various forms of actual financial integration include: Information sharing among financial institutions; sharing of best practices among financial institutions; sharing of cutting edge technologies among financial institutions; firms borrow and raise funds directly in the international capital markets; investors directly invest in the international capital markets; newly engineered financial products are domestically innovated and originated then sold and bought in the international capital markets; rapid adaption/copycat of newly engineered financial products among financial institutions in different economies; cross-border capital flows; and foreign participation in the domestic financial markets.

References

  1. ↑ Lucas, Robert (1990). "Why doesn't Capital Flow from Rich to Poor Countries?". American Economic Review . 80 (2): 92–96.
  2. ↑ Alfaro, Laura; Kalemli‐Ozcan, Sebnem; Volosovych, Vadym (2008). "Why Doesn't Capital Flow from Rich to Poor Countries? An Empirical Investigation" (PDF). Review of Economics and Statistics . 90 (2): 347–368. doi:10.1162/rest.90.2.347. S2CID   16534017.
  3. ↑ Montiel, Peter. "Obstacles to Investment in Africa: Explaining the Lucas Paradox" (PDF). Article. Retrieved 27 February 2011.
  4. ↑ Daude, Christian (2007). "The Quality of Institutions and Foreign Direct Investment". Economics & Politics. 19 (3): 317–344. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0343.2007.00318.x. S2CID   27057925.
  5. ↑ Saha, Sadhon; Sadekin, Md. Nazmus; Saha, Sanjoy Kumar (2022-10-01). "Effects of institutional quality on foreign direct investment inflow in lower-middle income countries". Heliyon. 8 (10): e10828. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10828. ISSN   2405-8440. PMC   9547205 .
  6. ↑ MARTIROSYAN, Arevik. "THE LUCAS PARADOX. THE REASONS BEHIND THE LOW CAPITAL FLOW INTO ARMENIA" (PDF). Article. Retrieved 6 December 2022.
  7. ↑ Schularick, Moritz. "The Lucas Paradox and the Quality of Institutions: Then and Now" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 July 2011. Retrieved 21 February 2011.
  8. ↑ Williamson, Jeffrey (2002). "Winners and Losers Over Two Centuries of Globalization". NBER Working Paper No. 9161. doi: 10.3386/w9161 .
  9. ↑ Ferguson, Niall. "The British Empire and Globalization" . Retrieved 28 February 2011.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.