Effectiveness of Bilateral and Multilateral Official Development Assistance on Economic Growth in CEMAC: An Expansion Variable Analysis Method
- 1 Maroua University, Maroua, Cameroon
Abstract
This study investigates the effectiveness of aid in Economic and Monetary Community of Central Africa (CEMAC) from 1978 to 2010. We use panel data model and the decomposition of Casetti and Jones to test the linkages between bilateral and multilateral Official Development Assistance (ODA) and economic growth. Four main conclusions were drawn: Firstly, the most prominent positive effects come from the interaction of aid and Foreign Direct Investment. Thus, the interaction of aid and FDI plays a significantly positive role in economic growth in CEMAC. This result assumes a form of complementarity between FDI and ODA flows in the subregion. Secondly, of t he four external sources of financing of the economy, Foreign Direct Invest ment (FDI) does not play a positive role in the growth in CEMAC. Thirdly, Economic growth in the sub-region seems to be more dependent on savings and the trade balance. Fourtly, according to origin of aid, multilateral aid as well as aid from the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) or Emerging Countries explains economic growth in CEMAC but its direct effect on it is negative. We find that of the three aid packages, DAC, emerging or multilateral, the DAC subsidies contribute the least negatively to growth. Public aid explains economic growth in CEMAC, but its effect on economic growth is negative; a 1% increase in ODA would lead to a 3% drop in growth.
- Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (2008). The Economics of Growth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Bauer, P. T. (1984). Reality and Rhetoric: Studies in the Economics of Development (p. 52). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Beck, T., Levine, R., & Loayza, N. (2000). Finance and the Sources of Growth. Journal of Financial Economics, 58, 261-300.
- Boccara, P. (1973). études sur le capitalisme monopoliste d’état, sa crise et son issue, éditions sociales (p. 226). Reprise d’un article d’Economie et Politique de déc 1969.
- Casetti, E., & Jones, J. P. III (1992). Applications of the Expansion Method. Londres: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203405383
- Charnoz, O., & Severino, J.-M. (2007). The Official Development Assistance. La Découverte.
- Chen, N. (2004). Intra-National versus International Trade in the European Union: Why Do National Borders Matter? Journal of International Economics, 63, 93-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1996(03)00042-4
- Comité d’aide au développement CAD (2005). La gestion de l’aide: Pratiques des pays membres du CAD. Paris: OCDE.
- Elliot, B. (1996). Dilemmas in Donor Aid Strategies. Mimeo, Workshop of External Resources for Development, Netherlands Economic Institute.
- Evsey, D. (1946). Capital Expansion, Rate of Growth, and Employment. Econometrica, 14, 137-147. https://doi.org/10.2307/1905364
- Gilbert, R. (2002). The History of Development: From Western Origins to Global Faith. New Delhi: Academic Foundation.
- Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (1997). Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels. Cambridge: Department of Applied Economics, University of Cambridge.
- Keith, G. (1970). Foreign Capital, Domestic Savings and Economic Development. Bulletin of the Oxford University Institute of Economics and Statistics, 32, 99-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.1970.mp32002002.x
- King, R. G., & Ross, L. (1993). Finance, Entrpreneurship and Growth. Journal of Monetary Economics, 32, 513-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(93)90028-E
- Lechevallier, A., Moreau, J., & Pacquement, F. (2007). Mieux gérer la mondialisation? L’aide publique au développement, Paris: ellipses.
- Levin, A., & Lin, C. F. (1992). Unit Root Test in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties. Discussion Paper 92-93, San Diego, CA: Department of Economics, University of California.