Who Gains from the Demographic Dividend? Forecasting Income by Age

Changes in the population age structure are known to influence the total income per person, but little is known about whether the changes are equally shared across the population or are concentrated on particular age groups and/or birth cohorts. The answer to this question has potentially important implications for income inequality, human capital investment, and fertility decision-making. We propose a new model of intergenerational transfers which distinguishes between the effects of changes in population structure and the effects of changes in family age structure. Using age-specific data from annual income and expenditure surveys of Taiwan between 1978 and 1998, we show that changes in age structure have had a very favorable effect on Taiwan's income growth. The gains are not equally shared by all age groups, however. Children and young adults have benefited the most, while the elderly have benefited the least. The population and family age structures have independent effects on per capita income; the effect of the population age structure is most important. Generational differences in per capita income are closely related to intergenerational differences in earnings, suggesting only a weak form of altruism. Finally, we predict that, on average, population aging will adversely influence the per capita income growth in Taiwan in the coming decades.     

Institutionalism versus Orthodoxy

A bstract . Orthodox economics has been quite effective in exploiting equilibrium methodology; equilibrium as a heuristic device, as a theoretical norm, and as a prototype of the scientific method. Also, orthodoxy has contrived the dichotomy of equilibrium-anti-equilibrium to depict institutional thought as being muddled and unscientific. Institutionalists have not successfully countered these attacks, nor have they adequately articulated a comprehensive methodological alternative to orthodoxy. Institutionalists have paid too much attention to the methodological components of institutionalism and have neglected the articulation of a guiding, overall methodology. It is proposed that institutionalists recast the methodological debate by expanding the arena from equilibrium-anti-equilibrium analysis to the broader context of closed versus open systems analysis. This would both help expose the methodological weaknesses of orthodox economics, and demonstrate the relevance and power of institutionalism for socioeconomic investigation.     

Between Collapse and Survival in North Korea: an Economic Assessment of the Dilemma

The current North Korean reform focuses on an open door policy without much import liberalization and on a partial domestic liberalization limited to the consumer sector. This can be considered a variant of the so-called East Asian growth model pursued in South Korea, Taiwan, and China. Although the basic directions of such a model are understandable, the intensity of the reform measures is not radical and strong enough, and the economy has exhausted domestic resources to rely on and is having difficulty in getting access to external resources. Collaboration from the US and South Korea is the most critical elements for the success of North Korean strategy since these will lower political uncertainty and give the regime access to international capital and markets.They may have at most two or three years to rely on and try a big push from the outside, which can hopefully give the system a new momentum for recovery. Otherwise, collapse is certain since they do not have their own ability to revitalize the economy. Success or failure of the next three-year reform will determine the future of North Korea. Failure, including the sudden stop of the reform by internal coup, could lead to collapse of the North Korean regime (hard landing), which will bring in radical reforms either by a new North Korean leadership or by a South Korean takeover. Success could lead to a widening and deepening of reforms to deal with the main body of the domestic economic system (Chinese style soft landing), or alternatively give room for stop-go style (Romania or Cuba style) muddling through.     

Fourth annual conference on financial economics and accounting

Announcement

Fourth annual conference on financial economics and accounting     

Sector-specific capital, “Bang-bang” investment,and the Filippov solution

Bang-bang investment in a two-sector growth model with immobile capital is rational and leads to a unique and globally stable long-run equilibrium along a sliding trajectory. This steady state coincides with the stationary equilibrium in the traditional model with non-sector-specific capital.This article was written while the authors were visiting scholars at Cornell University. We gratefully acknowledge financial assistance from the Erasmus University Trust Fund and the Netherlands Scientific Organization. We would like to thank, without implicating, two anonymous referees, Martijn Herrmann, Jean-Marie Viaene, Claus Weddepohl, and the participants of seminars at the University of Maryland, the University of Montreal, and Erasmus University Rotterdam for perceptive remarks and useful comments. Jeroen Hinloopen and Rien Wagenvoort provided able graphical assistance. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the World Bank.     

The Importance of Social Capital to the Management of Multinational Enterprises: Relational Networks Among Asian and Western Firms

Social capital is an important concept for multinational firms. Firms operating in global markets rarely have adequate resources to compete effectively in global markets; they access the needed resources through formal and informal relationships with other firms. The cultures in Asian countries have emphasized relationships much more strongly than Western firms. Thus, relational capital, based on guanxi (China), kankei (Japan) and inmak (Korea), provides the framework for business dealings in many Asian countries. As a result, the social capital of many Asian firms gives them a potential competitive advantage in global markets. Western firms must develop social capital and learn to manage relational networks to gain and sustain a competitive advantage in global markets. Western firms can learn how to develop and manage social capital from Asian firms. Alternatively, social capital has some disadvantages. Firms are limited by their networks and thus experience opportunity costs and path dependence. Additionally, while Asian firms often have strong network ties in their domestic markets, they have to develop many more ties globally to operate effectively in global markets. As a result, the development and management of social capital has become of critical importance for competitive advantage in global markets.