Is there convergence amongst shadow economies? International evidence

IF 0.9 4区经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS

American Journal of Economics and Sociology Pub Date : 2022-12-08 DOI:10.1111/ajes.12487

Camila Henriquez Mora, James W. Saunoris

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper examines convergence among cross-country shadow economies. Using the Phillips-Sul (2007, 2009) club convergence approach and data for over 150 countries from 1991 to 2017, the results show evidence against absolute convergence for all shadow economies; however, we find evidence of multiple convergence clubs. In particular, we find evidence for seven distinct convergence clubs and six divergent shadow economies. Each club is characterised by an increasingly larger shadow economy with the countries in club 1 having the largest shadow economy and those in club 7 having the smallest shadow economy. Using a two-way fixed effects approach, we also find that the determinants of the shadow economy are somewhat conditional on the convergence club. The existence of multiple equilibria suggests that policy makers in their attempt to combat the shadow economy would benefit by considering the different transitional paths associated with the different convergence clubs.

查看原文本刊更多论文

影子经济体之间是否存在趋同?国际证据

本文考察了跨国影子经济的趋同。利用philips - sul(2007年、2009年)俱乐部趋同方法和1991年至2017年150多个国家的数据，结果显示，所有影子经济都存在绝对趋同的证据;然而，我们发现了多个收敛俱乐部的证据。特别是，我们发现了七个不同的趋同俱乐部和六个不同的影子经济的证据。每个俱乐部的特点是影子经济规模越来越大，俱乐部1的影子经济规模最大，俱乐部7的影子经济规模最小。利用双向固定效应方法，我们还发现影子经济的决定因素在一定程度上取决于收敛俱乐部。多重均衡的存在表明，政策制定者在试图打击影子经济时，可以考虑与不同收敛俱乐部相关的不同过渡路径。

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

American Journal of Economics and Sociology Multiple-

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： The American Journal of Economics and Sociology (AJES) was founded in 1941, with support from the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, to encourage the development of transdisciplinary solutions to social problems. In the introduction to the first issue, John Dewey observed that “the hostile state of the world and the intellectual division that has been built up in so-called ‘social science,’ are … reflections and expressions of the same fundamental causes.” Dewey commended this journal for its intention to promote “synthesis in the social field.” Dewey wrote those words almost six decades after the social science associations split off from the American Historical Association in pursuit of value-free knowledge derived from specialized disciplines. Since he wrote them, academic or disciplinary specialization has become even more pronounced. Multi-disciplinary work is superficially extolled in major universities, but practices and incentives still favor highly specialized work. The result is that academia has become a bastion of analytic excellence, breaking phenomena into components for intensive investigation, but it contributes little synthetic or holistic understanding that can aid society in finding solutions to contemporary problems. Analytic work remains important, but in response to the current lop-sided emphasis on specialization, the board of AJES has decided to return to its roots by emphasizing a more integrated and practical approach to knowledge.