International financial remoteness and macroeconomic volatility / Andrew K. Rose, Mark M. Spiegel.
Material type:
TextSeries: Working paper series (National Bureau of Economic Research) ; no. 14336.Publication details: Cambridge, Mass. : National Bureau of Economic Research, 2008Description: 23 p. : ill. ; 22 cmSubject(s): International finance | Economic geographyLOC classification: HB1 | .N38 no. 14336Online resources: Click here to access online Summary: This paper shows that proximity to major international financial centers seems to reduce business cycle volatility. In particular, we show that countries that are further from major locations of international financial activity systematically experience more volatile growth rates in both output and consumption, even after accounting for political institutions, trade, and other controls. Our results are relatively robust in the sense that more financially remote countries are more volatile, though the results are not always statistically significant. The comparative strength of this finding is in contrast to the more ambiguous evidence found in the literature.
| Item type | Current library | Collection | Call number | Copy number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Book
|
University of Macedonia Library Βιβλιοστάσιο Β (Stack Room B) | Research Papers | HB1.N38 no. 14336 (Browse shelf (Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 0013119320 |
Includes bibliographical references (p. 15-16).
This paper shows that proximity to major international financial centers seems to reduce business cycle volatility. In particular, we show that countries that are further from major locations of international financial activity systematically experience more volatile growth rates in both output and consumption, even after accounting for political institutions, trade, and other controls. Our results are relatively robust in the sense that more financially remote countries are more volatile, though the results are not always statistically significant. The comparative strength of this finding is in contrast to the more ambiguous evidence found in the literature.
There are no comments on this title.