Commodity boom-bust cycles and the resource curse in Australia: 1900 to 2007

The Australian economy experienced very frequent and sizeable terms of trade shocks. These shocks at times were more pronounced than commodity exporting developing countries and disproportionately benefited the extreme top end of income distribution. Did they derail overall economic progress? Circumstantial evidence suggests that they did not, but hard econometric evidence appears to be rare. In this paper, I revisit the Australian resource curse question from a long-run perspective. Using time series data on commodity prices, real GDP, real wages, non-farm GDP, manufacturing share of GDP, and manufacturing share of employment covering the period 1900 to 2007, I find very little evidence of a resource curse. Commodity booms in general and positive agricultural price shocks in particular appear to have impacted the rest of the economy positively both in short- and long-run. The positive effect is primarily led by expansion in manufacturing. This is perhaps reflective of trade protection, labour and credit market flexibility, and relatively open skilled migration in Australia especially during the post-war period.     

Foreign Aid Heterogeneity: Issues and Agenda

The present paper serves as an introduction to this special issue providing a justification for, and linking and introducing to the articles that follow. A central message emanating from the papers included in this special issue is that it is not sufficient to double aid efforts by simply raising and transferring more money. Substantial effort needs to be taken in order to delve deeper into the various routes and transmission mechanisms through which the various types of aid operate. And this is a timely as well as important issue in view of recent calls (as well as concerns) for another “big push” approach in development aid. JEL no. F35     

“资源诅咒”成因新论

本文对"资源诅咒"现象及其成因进行了分析和梳理,认为现有传导机制理论尚不能完全说明"资源诅咒"存在的根本原因。文章认为,"资源诅咒"现象是在全球化竞争背景下日益凸显出来的,在很大程度上正是全球化竞争的结果和反映,其实质是现代经济发展模式对传统经济发展模式的冲击和抑制。"资源富集地区"和"欠发达地区"缺乏指导其基于自然资源实现经济增长的理论,致使这些地区在参与全球化竞争,尤其是在与"资源稀缺地区"和"发达地区"的竞争与合作中不知所措、被动应对,始终处于劣势,是"资源诅咒"问题产生的最重要的原因。     

Aid and trade

This paper surveys the recent theoretical and empirical literaturethat explores the relations between aid and trade and asks aboutthe complementarity or substitution effects at work. We distinguishbetween the effects of aid on trade flows and on trade policies,of the donor as well as the recipient countries. Special focusis given on trade facilitation, or ‘aid for trade’.     

What Determines the Size of Aid Projects?

Over the last few years, considerable attention has focused on aid fragmentation, the proliferation of donors and projects in developing countries. Aid fragmentation has continued to increase despite international efforts to foster donor coordination. One possible implication of fragmentation is smaller aid projects, potentially with the result of more administrative work for overtaxed recipient governments per dollar of aid received.This paper makes use of AidData data on bilateral aid commitments, sector, and funding agencies to explore the determinants of project size and to better understand the forces driving aid fragmentation. To the extent that project size is driven by the sectoral composition or purpose of aid, the associated administrative costs may be justified. Variations due to other factors, e.g. a donor’s administrative structure or bureaucratic interests, provide a stronger case for reforms.     

25 Years of Aid Allocation Practice: Whither Selectivity?

The 4P framework (Poverty, Population, Policy, and Proximity) is introduced as a way of understanding a donor’s aid allocation. We use the two-part model and examine the period 1982–2006. The results indicate that recent conclusions of increasing selectivity are misplaced for the seven major donors analyzed, who together represent the majority of development aid. Indeed, the effect of each of the commonly mentioned time-trends (selectivity, the end of the Cold War, and the commencement of the Global War on Terror) is much smaller than the role of donor heterogeneity, which appears sizeable and entrenched.