This paper evaluates (1) whether the exogenous component of financial intermediary development influences economic growth and (2) whether cross-country differences in legal and accounting systems (e.g., creditor rights, contract enforcement, and accounting standards) explain differences in the level of financial development. Using both traditional cross-section, instrumental variable procedures and recent dynamic panel techniques, we find that the exogenous components of financial intermediary development is positively associated with economic growth. Also, the data show that cross-country differences in legal and accounting systems help account for differences in financial development. Together, these findings suggest that legal and accounting reforms that strengthen creditor rights, contract enforcement, and accounting practices can boost financial development and accelerate economic growth.

Abstract not found

Abstract not found

This paper evaluates the importance of “property rights institutions”, which protect citizens against expropriation by the government and powerful elites, and “contracting institutions”, which enable private contracts between citizens. We exploit exogenous variation in both types of institutions driven by colonial history, and document strong firststage relationships between property rights institutions and the determinants of European colonization strategy (settler mortality and population density before colonization), and between contracting institutions and the identity of the colonizing power. Using this instrumental variables approach, we find that property rights institutions have a first-order effect on long-run economic growth, investment, and financial development. Contracting institutions appear to matter only for the form of financial intermediation. A possible explanation for this pattern is that individuals often find ways of altering the terms of their formal and informal contracts to avoid the adverse effects of contracting institutions, but are unable to do so against the risk of expropriation.

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

We document five stylized facts of economic growth. (1) The “residual ” rather than factor accumulation accounts for most of the income and growth differences across nations. (2) Income diverges over the long run. (3) Factor accumulation is persistent while growth is not persistent and the growth path of countries exhibits remarkable variation across countries. (4) Economic activity is highly concentrated, with all factors of production flowing to the richest areas. (5) National policies closely associated with long-run economic growth rates. We argue that these facts do not support models with diminishing returns, constant returns to scale, some fixed factor of production, and that highlight the role of factor accumulation. Empirical work, however, does not yet decisively distinguish among the different theoretical conceptions of “total factor productivity growth.” Economists should devote more effort towards modeling and quantifying total factor productivity.

We show that equity market liberalizations, on average, lead to a one percent increase in annual real economic growth over a five-year period. The effect is robust to alternative definitions of liberalization and does not reflect a business cycle effect. The channel of growth is both increased investment post liberalization which partially reflects a decreased cost of capital and increased factor productivity. The additional investment is largely financed by foreign capital leading to deteriorating trade balances. Some of the liberalization effect can be accounted for by coincidental macroeconomic reforms as well as financial development. However, our analysis shows that even after controlling for a broad range of variables, a statistically significant and economically important role is played by equity market liberalization. We appreciate the helpful comments of Wayne Ferson, Peter Henry, Ross Levine, Graciela Kaminsky,

Abstract not found

We are grateful to Yongsung Chang and three referees, particularly the final referee, for useful comments. Saasha Celestial-One provided excellent research assistance. Does Schooling Cause Growth? Barro (1991) and others find that growth and schooling are highly correlated across countries. A model is examined in which the ability to build on the human capital of one's elders plays an important role in linking growth to schooling. The model is calibrated to quantify the strength of the effect of schooling on growth by using evidence from the labor literature on Mincerian (1974) returns to education. The upshot is that the impact of schooling on growth explains less than one third of the empirical cross-country relationship. The model is extended to address the choice of schooling, showing that faster growth can induce more schooling by raising its effective return. Calibrating schooling choices suggests that this reverse channel can potentially explain one half or more of the observed relationship between schooling and

This paper -- a product of the Finance and Private Sector Development Division, Policy Research Department -- is pa't of a larger effort in the department to understand the links between the financial system and economic growth. The study was funded by the Bank's Research Support Budget under the research project "Stock Market Development and Financial Intermediary Growth" (RPO 679-53). Copies of this paper are available free from the World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433. Please contact Paulina Sintim-Aboagye, room N9-030, telephone 202-473-8526, fax 202-525- 1155, Internet address psintimaboagye@worldbank.org. December 1996. (44 pages) The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less tban fully pollsbed. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. Tbe findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed m tbis paper are entirely those of tbe author. They do not necessarily represent the view of the World Bank, its Executive Directors, or the countries they represent