A panel causality analysis of the relationship between financial development and economic growth in OECD countries

Sevilay Küçüksakarya
{"title":"A panel causality analysis of the relationship between financial development and economic growth in OECD countries","authors":"Sevilay Küçüksakarya","doi":"10.15295/bmij.v9i2.1817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the relationship between financial development and economic growth. Thus, this study aims to find empirical shreds of evidence for the direction of the causality between financial development proxied by domestic credit to the private sector and per capita GDP growth by using the panel granger causality test of the Dumitrescu-Hurlin Test. For this purpose, we used a panel of 16 OECD countries from 2008 to 2019 to provide evidence of whether the supply leading hypothesis or demand following hypothesis or both holds. All econometric exercises are carried out for whole countries and high-income countries, and upper-middle-income country groups in the sample. Due to cross-sectional dependence among the sample countries, we determine the degree of integration of each variable by employing the second-generation panel unit root tests of CIPS. We continue our analysis with the panel causality test developed by Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) to determine the direction of the causality between variables. For this purpose, we performed three sets of causality analyses. In the first one, we include all countries in the panel. We then divided the countries into two sub-groups based on the income classification and the level of financial development in these countries proxied by domestic credit to the private sector. The causality test results, including all countries in the sample, indicate that the hypothesis holds the supply leading hypothesis during the sample period. This means that even though this panel contains countries with a development level, financial development still seems to be a pre-condition for economic growth for these nations. We also obtain the same results when we include high-income countries in the sample. The study results provide compelling evidence for the relationship between economic growth and financial development since the sample includes countries with different levels of financial development with different degrees of per capita GDP growth.","PeriodicalId":333522,"journal":{"name":"Business & Management Studies: An International Journal","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business & Management Studies: An International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v9i2.1817","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between financial development and economic growth. Thus, this study aims to find empirical shreds of evidence for the direction of the causality between financial development proxied by domestic credit to the private sector and per capita GDP growth by using the panel granger causality test of the Dumitrescu-Hurlin Test. For this purpose, we used a panel of 16 OECD countries from 2008 to 2019 to provide evidence of whether the supply leading hypothesis or demand following hypothesis or both holds. All econometric exercises are carried out for whole countries and high-income countries, and upper-middle-income country groups in the sample. Due to cross-sectional dependence among the sample countries, we determine the degree of integration of each variable by employing the second-generation panel unit root tests of CIPS. We continue our analysis with the panel causality test developed by Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) to determine the direction of the causality between variables. For this purpose, we performed three sets of causality analyses. In the first one, we include all countries in the panel. We then divided the countries into two sub-groups based on the income classification and the level of financial development in these countries proxied by domestic credit to the private sector. The causality test results, including all countries in the sample, indicate that the hypothesis holds the supply leading hypothesis during the sample period. This means that even though this panel contains countries with a development level, financial development still seems to be a pre-condition for economic growth for these nations. We also obtain the same results when we include high-income countries in the sample. The study results provide compelling evidence for the relationship between economic growth and financial development since the sample includes countries with different levels of financial development with different degrees of per capita GDP growth.
经济合作与发展组织国家金融发展与经济增长关系的面板因果分析
本研究探讨金融发展与经济增长之间的关系。因此,本研究旨在通过dumitrescup - hurlin检验的面板格兰杰因果检验,寻找国内私营部门信贷所代表的金融发展与人均GDP增长之间因果关系走向的实证证据。为此,我们使用了一个由16个经合组织国家组成的小组,从2008年到2019年,来提供证据,证明供应主导假说还是需求跟随假说,或者两者都成立。所有计量经济学练习都是针对样本中的整个国家、高收入国家和中高收入国家群体进行的。由于样本国家之间的横截面依赖性,我们通过采用CIPS的第二代面板单位根检验来确定每个变量的整合程度。我们继续使用Dumitrescu和Hurlin(2012)开发的面板因果检验进行分析,以确定变量之间的因果关系方向。为此,我们进行了三组因果关系分析。在第一个图中,我们把所有国家都包括在小组中。然后,我们根据收入分类和这些国家的金融发展水平(以国内对私营部门的信贷为代表)将这些国家分为两个子组。包括样本中所有国家在内的因果检验结果表明,该假设在样本期间成立供应领先假设。这意味着,即使这个小组包含了具有发展水平的国家,金融发展似乎仍然是这些国家经济增长的先决条件。当我们将高收入国家纳入样本时,我们也得到了相同的结果。研究结果为经济增长与金融发展之间的关系提供了令人信服的证据,因为样本包括了不同金融发展水平和不同人均GDP增长程度的国家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信